December 26, 2023 • 18 mins
On today's episode we countdown the top influence scandals of 2023.
ShopBack
This festive season, make the most out of your shopping by using the ShopBack app to earn EXTRA cashback on top of the sales! If you’re new to ShopBack, we have a little gift for you. Use the code OUTSPOKEN before you sign up for a bonus $20 in your account. Follow the link now to sign up and redeem your bonus $20: https://app.shopback.com/aus/partner/OUTSPOKEN
Subscribe to Outspoken Plus
Outspoken Plus is our subscription offering that provides subscribers with exclusive access to BONUS weekly episodes. Every week, we’ll be dropping content so juicy, we’ve had to put it behind a paywall.A monthly Outspoken Plus subscription costs $5.99 a month, or save with our annual package, for just $49.99 a year*.
There are three ways you can become an Outspoken Plus subscriber. Apple users can subscribe via Apple Podcasts here: apple.co/outspoken, while Android users can subscribe via Spotify here: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/outspoken-plus/subscribe or Patreon here: https://www.patreon.com/outspoken_plus. * An annual subscription is only available on Apple Podcasts.
Follow Outspoken
Follow Outspoken on Instagram and TikTok, plus join in on the conversation in our Facebook Community. Podcast hosted by Amy Taeuber, Kate Taeuber and Sophie Taeuber.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
We want to issue a trigger warning as this episode
discusses animal cruelty and child exploitation. Hello and welcome to Outspoken.
On today's show, we are counting down the top five
influencer scandals of twenty twenty three. God, there have been
some huge scandals this year. I can't wait to get
into them before we do, though, I hope that everyone
had an amazing Christmas with their family and friends. It
(00:22):
is depressing that Christmas is over. I have been speaking
now for weeks about how it's just gone so quickly.
This whole year has gone quickly. I can't believe there's
only a few more days left of twenty twenty three. Oh,
it is crazy. Particularly when I was reflecting what's actually
happened in the influencer space this year, it was actually
hard to pick five top scandals, and a lot of them.
I was like, oh, that only happened a couple of
(00:43):
months ago, but it was back in January or February.
Let's start the countdown. Now, coming in at number five
is the Karna Irby photoshopping debacle. So this happened back
in May when an American sloper sluthor count run by
John Dawesy accused the body positivity influencer of editing her
body on Instagram. Now, she was labeled a hypocrite because
(01:03):
her whole social media platform is based on embracing your body,
and she even urges her followers not to edit their
own photos. This story was massive, particularly because Instagram watchdog
account Influence Updates got dragged into the drama. So, like usual,
she picked up on the story and reshared the real
to her account. Absolute chaos followed. So it turned out
(01:24):
that Karna allegedly sent both John and Influencer updates AU
a cease and desist letter demanding they remove the content
before blocking them. The best bit is that Karina wrote
crease and desist rather than cease and desist. Look, I
wouldn't quite say the Influencer Updates was dragged into this drama.
She was quite happy to report on it. But it's
(01:45):
quite funny the turn of events suddenly when these pages
start reporting that they have been sent legal letters and
it becomes part of the story. Well, I don't think
she was expecting the backlash that occurred because she simply
just reshared the reel. It wasn't like she was further
commenting on it. She was just aring it to her audience. Now.
Rather than backing down, John used the moment to call
Karina out for more alleged photoshopping. It was then time
(02:08):
for Karina to release a statement, so she admitted to
editing her photos in the past and said that she
suffers from mild body dysmorphia. Things didn't end there, so
Karna then enlisted the help of a lawyer who sent
John the most bizarre legal letter I've ever read. It
sounded completely unprofessional and very highly emotive. For instance, one
(02:29):
of the lines read, it is one thing to call
my client out for photoshopping photos and being hypocritical. It
is another to obsess over my client, pick a public
fight with her, and encourage others to bully and incite
hate towards her. The letter then oddly also confirmed the
original claims that Dawsy made, stating to be frank my
client gently photoshopping photos, not immediately owning up to it,
(02:51):
and responding in a way that suggests the conduct you
complained about was old. Behavior does not deserve the vitual
your repeated videos and aggressive hate campanes continue to incite.
Well done on reading that out, because it was a
very long run on sense. It was a bit of
a struggle. Yeah. Now, John ended up enlisting the free
service of an American lawyer who absolutely schooled Karna's Gold
(03:14):
Coast lawyer in Australian defamation law. Now he referred to
the original legal letter as a prank cease and assistance
that it obviously must have been sent in jest. He
also labeled Karina's claims as farcical and said the lawyer
had failed to include any legal authority to demonstrate how
Karina was entitled to relief in the Federal Court of Australia. Now,
(03:35):
this line was my favorite bit, he wrote. Rest assured
I've at least convinced him that it was certainly not
some impulsive, ham fisted attempt to bully an individual solely
because of his well known efforts to shed lights on
the Charlatans ramp it throughout the fitness industry. After all,
as lawyers, you and I both know that would be
flagrantly unconstitutional. I love that people are finally hitting back
(03:56):
at these bullshit legal letters that are being sent out
by influencers, because quite frankly, most of the time they
are not worth the paper that they are written. On. Yeah,
but I'm actually surprised though that these lawyers will even
send them out, because it's quite embarrassing for this legal
firm to put their name to it. No, it's all
about threatening people most of the time. There's no legal
substance to these letters that are being sent out, and
(04:17):
it's just in a way to try and rinse people
of any money. Yeah, but this one was written in
such an unprofessional way. It wasn't evenly a motive, wasn't it. Now.
As for Influencer updates AU, she ended up removing the
real and announce she was taking a break from public
posting and would only share updates to her paying close
friends list. This was clearly the straw that broke the
(04:37):
camel's back, because Amber, the owner of Influencer updates AU,
then went on to say that this was the sign
that she needed to make the decision to change the
page over to a subscriber sort of format, and she
felt like a weight had been lifted off her shoulders.
Since then, she has been posting constant updates to her
close friends list, but she has returned to publicly posting
feed posts now, Sophie, I feel like this one has
(04:59):
a special place in your heart. Coming in at number
four is Lily Brown and her smelly pajamas. So back
in August, Lily gave influences a masterclass on how not
to respond to criticism. So it all started when her
sleepwear line She'll, issued an apology to customers after receiving
complaints that their latest pajama range had an unusual odor.
(05:21):
So in an email to affected customers, the brand stated
that the unfamiliar scent was caused by an eco die
used in manufacturing. And if you're wondering, well, what did
those pajamas smell like? One of our listeners wrote in
alleging the chill was stinky, Let me tell you that
it smelt like boiled egg after you peel it. Best
way to describe it geez. I could not imagine wanting
(05:43):
to sleep in that sort of scent. The funniest thing
was that in this email that they sent out to
customers alerting them of what had happened, they were trying
to come up with a remedy of how to get
rid of it, and they said, oh, you've got to
wash it a number of times. In this particular solution,
it was in white vas and buikarb soda and to me,
I always see this as a remedy to make things
(06:05):
smell better, but whenever I've used it, it actually makes things
smell worse. Yeah. A few days later, Lily then jumped
in her stories to finally address the matter personally and said,
I think we're close to cracking how to get rid
of this smell. So this smell must have been so
pungent that even this proposed solution did not work. It
reminds me of that episode of Seinfeld when that guy's
(06:26):
bo attaches itself to the car. Now, two options were
then provided to customers. Those who wanted to keep their
smelly pajamas were told they could get fifty percent store credit,
while those who wanted to return their pjs could get
one hundred percent store credit. However, the option of a
full refund was omitted. Now we ended up getting dragged
into the drama after we merely reported on the facts
(06:48):
of this story in an Instagram reel. So after that,
Lily DM, thus demanding that we take the video down.
When we declined, she publicly commented on the video, calling
it fake news and claimed we slanted her name and
her business. She also said not issuing refunds would be
against the law. There was a lot of back and forth,
(07:09):
but essentially Lily ended up confirming the pajamas were in
fact faulty. She also said that the option of a
refund was always available to customers, and it was stated
on the website. But I personally found this to be
quite deceptive because when the original letter came out alerting
customers to the issue, they only offered store credit. They
(07:30):
didn't say that any exchanges were possible, so they assumed
that the consumer knew that legally they had the right
to an exchange. That's what Lily said, So she said,
all consumers know they are entitled to a full refund,
so there was no point including it in the original email. Now, interestingly,
Chill's website returns page only offers store credit to not
full refunds, like Lily had stated. Now we ended up
(07:51):
receiving a legal letter and I do use that term
loosely from Lily's manager. I didn't think that managers had
law degrees. No, I mean this one did. So she
accused us of defamation and slander and said if we
didn't agree to their terms, they would seek legal action.
So Essentially what they wanted was they wanted us to
take the reel down and to not comment on the
(08:11):
matter any further. Now, what we ended up doing was
a full episode on the segment, and because it wasn't
worth the paper, the legal letter was written on. We
didn't mention this in the original segment, but it was
quite disappointing because around that time we got a lot
of abuse from one particular account who was linked to
a number of Lily Brown's friends, pinpointing our age and
(08:32):
making derogatory comments towards us. And when you're just reporting
news at the end of the day and facts that
have been put out from a statement, I didn't quite
understand the complete hostility, and that account seemed to know
a lot about what was going on behind the scenes,
was really sticking up full Lily. So it was quite
interesting anyway. Moving on at number three, we have Ruby
(08:52):
Tuesday Matthews, who back in May was accused of sharing
an exploitative photo of her four year old son to
sell a hat for her and Roby. Now. Ruby got
her son Mars, to model in the marketing campaign at
a banana farm. Now in the photo, the four year
old was photographed shirtless in low slung pants standing next
to a box of bananas that said lady fingers. Now.
(09:14):
The backlash was swift, with people labeling the photo exploitative
and disgusting. Ruby was also accused of being ignorant to
the dangers of online predators. Now. Ruby addressed the concerns
on her Instagram story, claiming she had taken the photos
of her son on her iPhone and it wasn't a
staged photo shoot. This is despite Ruby tagging a professional
(09:34):
photographer in the photos and reels. For me, it doesn't
really change things. If she took the photo or the
photographer took the photo, there was still the choice to
publish these photos. I think she was trying to act
like it was just the way the kid happened to
be standing. It wasn't some sort of photo shoot where
he was instructed to stand in a certain way. Now.
Ruby then explained that they had visited her friend's banana
(09:56):
farm and that's just how Mars was wearing his outfit
that day. She so defended the images, saying I'd also
like to say, if you were sexualizing that image of him,
I think you actually need to have a look at
the bigger picture of what your issue is, and maybe
you have become so overly sensitive that the line is
blurred of what is wrong and what is right, and
(10:16):
there is nothing wrong with that image. Now, that was
really a sad turn of events because Ruby revealed that
she had been a victim of sexual assault at fourteen,
which has made her super aware and vigilant around the
content that she shares of her children. And she went
on to say that she could claim the backlash had
triggered her, but she's a little bigger than that. She
finished up by saying how soft she thinks society is
(10:37):
these days, and that the lines have been so blurred
that anything can be taken the wrong way. Now. Adam Whittington,
the CEO of a not for profit charity that fights
to end child trafficking and exploitation of children, weighed into
the matter, labeling the photos as total exploitation of the child.
He also said it happens every single time a so
called influencer gets caught up exploiting their own kids. They always, always,
(11:02):
always say, in response to the backlash, if you see
my child's image as sexual, you have the problem. You
need to look at your stick problems. They then send
trolls to make comments in support of their actions, or
call those genuinely trying to help them by educating them
trolls and haters. Now, coming in at third place, we
have the South Australian Tourism Commission's Influencer only event with
(11:23):
Sam Smith. Now, South Australians were left less than impressed
when they were not only excluded from being able to
attend the concert, but discovered their taxpayer funds we used
to pay for the exclusive event. Now as South Australians ourselves,
the state was in uproar. I was pissed off about this.
It was just such a bad look. So the invite
(11:44):
only event was Sam's only performance in Australia and the
first in South Australia since twenty fifteen. So in total,
three hundred people were invited and the Tourism Minister, Zoe
Bettison claimed one hundred and fifteen were competition winners, while
ninety were influences and media personalities and twenty one were
SATC staff Lucky SATC stuff getting a front row ticket
(12:06):
to that. Now, the event was supposed to attract national
and international exposure for the state through Sam's social channels
as well as the influencers. The problem was the Contra
deal offered by the government didn't attract big name influencers,
and furthermore, as the influencers were obligated to post, the
coverage was very minimal, with most of it disappearing after
(12:29):
twenty four hours. They were clearly banking on Sam Smith
sharing this to their account because they do have over
fourteen million followers. The only catch was the content that
they did share was of them outside McDonald's on South
Road and it was a glamorous spot. No because the
Tourism Commission they'd taken them to all of these fancy restaurants,
(12:53):
winder Stars, grease, wined and dined them and then that
was the photo that they chose to share them outside
this huge golden Arch sign. They literally could have been anywhere.
Now in March, the ABC obtained documents which revealed the
details of the deal the SATC struck with influencers to
get them to attend the event. So for some interstate influences,
(13:14):
the Contra deal included free flights, transfers, accommodation and meals,
with the commercial costs predicted at two thousand dollars per influencer. Now,
the SATC confirmed that they shared the cost for the
event with Frontier Touring, who was putting on Sam Smith's concert,
and in January, Tourism Minister Zoe Betterson said the Sam
Smith concert cost less than half a million dollars and
(13:36):
resulted in thirty two million dollars worth of advertising for
the state. This was despite the fact that a review
found that they had absolutely no way to measure the
influencer's return on investments. Yes, so the results of a
review into the handling of the event were revealed in May,
and it was found that the SATC needed a greater
level of transparency when choosing which influencers to engage with.
(13:59):
Sa also agreed to overhaul its policies about engaging with influences.
We also have to mention the fact that there was
a rogue pisser, so someone apparently pissed in the mosh pit.
This was being reported at the time. We still don't
know who that influencer is. Yeah, and also this was
the first event that Sophie Kaisha attended with her new girlfriend,
(14:21):
Sophie vander Hoovel, so Sophie actually shared vision of her
cuddling into the other Sophie at the Sam Smith concert
recently for Sophie's birthday. God, it must be so confusing
with them both being called Sophie. I'm called Sophie, and
when we're reporting on issues with Sophie Guidlin and Sophie Kasha,
it gets confusing. The amount of sophie is that are
flying around. Well, I think Sophie Kaysha calls her VD instead.
(14:46):
Now I feel like we need a drum roll because
coming in in top spot for Outspoken's Biggest Influencer scandal
of twenty twenty three is Emma Clair. So. In April,
she shocked the internet when she admitted to killing two
cats as a child. I can't believe this was in April.
This just feels like the other day now. The twenty
eight year old made the disgusting revelation on her newly
(15:07):
revamped podcast called Simply Chaotic, and the timing could not
have been worse for Emma, who had just given birth
to her first child a week earlier. Now. As a refresher,
Emma and her co host Kirsty had been sharing personal
secrets on the podcast. When Emma said, I've got one.
I killed my cat, but I promise I'm really good
with my animals. She then went on to say, I
(15:28):
didn't mean to I was young, I was a child.
I was swinging my cat around like I was thinking
it was just a stuff toy, and I accidentally let
go of it. That is really difficult to listen to again.
It is deeply disturbing. The incident that took place, and
the fact that she thinks that this is some sort
of fun secret to share on a podcast. Let's get
to know me better. Oh, I horrifically murdered a pet cat. Oh,
(15:51):
it is so disgusting. Emma did later confirm that the
cat died from fright rather than an injury, and she
also said her sister didn't speak to her for months
following the incident and that her mum was fucking fuming.
She would then went on to say, I'm giggling about
it now, but this happened years and years ago, and
like I was a fucking little child. Emma then finished
up by offhandly revealing that she also killed her best
(16:14):
friend's cat. For her to then reveal that this wasn't
an isolated incident and this has actually happened a second
time with another friend's cat, was just so deeply troubling. Yeah,
it really was. I just still can't believe that she
even recorded this, edited it, and then put it out
for the world to listener, and also used it as
a teaser to promote the episode. That's so true. This
(16:36):
wasn't live. This was said with a lot of hindsight,
and I just can't still get over it now. The
backlash was swift, causing Emma to share a statement. However,
rather than apologizing, she told her followers to chill and
said the story is a bit of light humor. She
also advised her audience to not listen to her podcast
if they couldn't handle the humor. She finished the statement
(16:57):
by writing again, sorry, not sorry for an hour accident
that happened over twenty years ago, and sorry not sorry
for having a giggle about it, because I think, still
twenty years on, I'm in shock by it now. Following
Emma's statement, multiple brands cut ties with her, including Lust
Minerals and MC beauty. A day later, Emmett had suddenly
(17:17):
changed her tune, apologizing for sharing the story and stating
that she was well aware that the story was not
light humor and in fact very serious. She also deleted
the story from her podcast, however, kept up the promotional
material that featured the story. She did end up leaving
social media shortly after the incident due to the apparent
bullying and death threats that she received. Before leaving the platform,
(17:39):
she said, the last nine weeks have been the toughest
of my life and my mental health has been destroyed.
Now she has stayed offline since then, I am wondering
if we will see her return this year. I am
really surprised Kate that Sarah's Day has not made the
top five scandals for this year. Well, if we were
doing a top ten, I was thinking of putting her
(18:00):
Sunny scandal in there, But I have noticed that she
really has taken a step back from really big scandals.
She's been wearing up to go though, since she has
shut down Sunny, so I feel like she may feature
next year. Yeah. I am really excited to see what
unfolds next year. Now, thank you so much for listening
to today's episode. If you have enjoyed it, could you
please make sure you do share across your stories. Yes,
(18:22):
and we do hope you have a wonderful New Year's
For Outspoken Plus subscribers, we will be counting down the
top five relationship dramas of twenty twenty three, so if
you are a subscriber and are looking for more content
to get you through the holiday period, it is a
great time to sign up now. This podcast was recorded
on the traditional land of the Ghana people of the
Adelaide Planes. We pay respect to elders past and present,
We want to issue a trigger warning as this episode
discusses animal cruelty and child exploitation. Hello and welcome to Outspoken.
On today's show, we are counting down the top five
influencer scandals of twenty twenty three. God, there have been
some huge scandals this year. I can't wait to get
into them before we do, though, I hope that everyone
had an amazing Christmas with their family and friends. It
(00:22):
is depressing that Christmas is over. I have been speaking
now for weeks about how it's just gone so quickly.
This whole year has gone quickly. I can't believe there's
only a few more days left of twenty twenty three. Oh,
it is crazy. Particularly when I was reflecting what's actually
happened in the influencer space this year, it was actually
hard to pick five top scandals, and a lot of them.
I was like, oh, that only happened a couple of
(00:43):
months ago, but it was back in January or February.
Let's start the countdown. Now, coming in at number five
is the Karna Irby photoshopping debacle. So this happened back
in May when an American sloper sluthor count run by
John Dawesy accused the body positivity influencer of editing her
body on Instagram. Now, she was labeled a hypocrite because
(01:03):
her whole social media platform is based on embracing your body,
and she even urges her followers not to edit their
own photos. This story was massive, particularly because Instagram watchdog
account Influence Updates got dragged into the drama. So, like usual,
she picked up on the story and reshared the real
to her account. Absolute chaos followed. So it turned out
(01:24):
that Karna allegedly sent both John and Influencer updates AU
a cease and desist letter demanding they remove the content
before blocking them. The best bit is that Karina wrote
crease and desist rather than cease and desist. Look, I
wouldn't quite say the Influencer Updates was dragged into this drama.
She was quite happy to report on it. But it's
(01:45):
quite funny the turn of events suddenly when these pages
start reporting that they have been sent legal letters and
it becomes part of the story. Well, I don't think
she was expecting the backlash that occurred because she simply
just reshared the reel. It wasn't like she was further
commenting on it. She was just aring it to her audience. Now.
Rather than backing down, John used the moment to call
Karina out for more alleged photoshopping. It was then time
(02:08):
for Karina to release a statement, so she admitted to
editing her photos in the past and said that she
suffers from mild body dysmorphia. Things didn't end there, so
Karna then enlisted the help of a lawyer who sent
John the most bizarre legal letter I've ever read. It
sounded completely unprofessional and very highly emotive. For instance, one
(02:29):
of the lines read, it is one thing to call
my client out for photoshopping photos and being hypocritical. It
is another to obsess over my client, pick a public
fight with her, and encourage others to bully and incite
hate towards her. The letter then oddly also confirmed the
original claims that Dawsy made, stating to be frank my
client gently photoshopping photos, not immediately owning up to it,
(02:51):
and responding in a way that suggests the conduct you
complained about was old. Behavior does not deserve the vitual
your repeated videos and aggressive hate campanes continue to incite.
Well done on reading that out, because it was a
very long run on sense. It was a bit of
a struggle. Yeah. Now, John ended up enlisting the free
service of an American lawyer who absolutely schooled Karna's Gold
(03:14):
Coast lawyer in Australian defamation law. Now he referred to
the original legal letter as a prank cease and assistance
that it obviously must have been sent in jest. He
also labeled Karina's claims as farcical and said the lawyer
had failed to include any legal authority to demonstrate how
Karina was entitled to relief in the Federal Court of Australia. Now,
(03:35):
this line was my favorite bit, he wrote. Rest assured
I've at least convinced him that it was certainly not
some impulsive, ham fisted attempt to bully an individual solely
because of his well known efforts to shed lights on
the Charlatans ramp it throughout the fitness industry. After all,
as lawyers, you and I both know that would be
flagrantly unconstitutional. I love that people are finally hitting back
(03:56):
at these bullshit legal letters that are being sent out
by influencers, because quite frankly, most of the time they
are not worth the paper that they are written. On. Yeah,
but I'm actually surprised though that these lawyers will even
send them out, because it's quite embarrassing for this legal
firm to put their name to it. No, it's all
about threatening people most of the time. There's no legal
substance to these letters that are being sent out, and
(04:17):
it's just in a way to try and rinse people
of any money. Yeah, but this one was written in
such an unprofessional way. It wasn't evenly a motive, wasn't it. Now.
As for Influencer updates AU, she ended up removing the
real and announce she was taking a break from public
posting and would only share updates to her paying close
friends list. This was clearly the straw that broke the
(04:37):
camel's back, because Amber, the owner of Influencer updates AU,
then went on to say that this was the sign
that she needed to make the decision to change the
page over to a subscriber sort of format, and she
felt like a weight had been lifted off her shoulders.
Since then, she has been posting constant updates to her
close friends list, but she has returned to publicly posting
feed posts now, Sophie, I feel like this one has
(04:59):
a special place in your heart. Coming in at number
four is Lily Brown and her smelly pajamas. So back
in August, Lily gave influences a masterclass on how not
to respond to criticism. So it all started when her
sleepwear line She'll, issued an apology to customers after receiving
complaints that their latest pajama range had an unusual odor.
(05:21):
So in an email to affected customers, the brand stated
that the unfamiliar scent was caused by an eco die
used in manufacturing. And if you're wondering, well, what did
those pajamas smell like? One of our listeners wrote in
alleging the chill was stinky, Let me tell you that
it smelt like boiled egg after you peel it. Best
way to describe it geez. I could not imagine wanting
(05:43):
to sleep in that sort of scent. The funniest thing
was that in this email that they sent out to
customers alerting them of what had happened, they were trying
to come up with a remedy of how to get
rid of it, and they said, oh, you've got to
wash it a number of times. In this particular solution,
it was in white vas and buikarb soda and to me,
I always see this as a remedy to make things
(06:05):
smell better, but whenever I've used it, it actually makes things
smell worse. Yeah. A few days later, Lily then jumped
in her stories to finally address the matter personally and said,
I think we're close to cracking how to get rid
of this smell. So this smell must have been so
pungent that even this proposed solution did not work. It
reminds me of that episode of Seinfeld when that guy's
(06:26):
bo attaches itself to the car. Now, two options were
then provided to customers. Those who wanted to keep their
smelly pajamas were told they could get fifty percent store credit,
while those who wanted to return their pjs could get
one hundred percent store credit. However, the option of a
full refund was omitted. Now we ended up getting dragged
into the drama after we merely reported on the facts
(06:48):
of this story in an Instagram reel. So after that,
Lily DM, thus demanding that we take the video down.
When we declined, she publicly commented on the video, calling
it fake news and claimed we slanted her name and
her business. She also said not issuing refunds would be
against the law. There was a lot of back and forth,
(07:09):
but essentially Lily ended up confirming the pajamas were in
fact faulty. She also said that the option of a
refund was always available to customers, and it was stated
on the website. But I personally found this to be
quite deceptive because when the original letter came out alerting
customers to the issue, they only offered store credit. They
(07:30):
didn't say that any exchanges were possible, so they assumed
that the consumer knew that legally they had the right
to an exchange. That's what Lily said, So she said,
all consumers know they are entitled to a full refund,
so there was no point including it in the original email. Now, interestingly,
Chill's website returns page only offers store credit to not
full refunds, like Lily had stated. Now we ended up
(07:51):
receiving a legal letter and I do use that term
loosely from Lily's manager. I didn't think that managers had
law degrees. No, I mean this one did. So she
accused us of defamation and slander and said if we
didn't agree to their terms, they would seek legal action.
So Essentially what they wanted was they wanted us to
take the reel down and to not comment on the
(08:11):
matter any further. Now, what we ended up doing was
a full episode on the segment, and because it wasn't
worth the paper, the legal letter was written on. We
didn't mention this in the original segment, but it was
quite disappointing because around that time we got a lot
of abuse from one particular account who was linked to
a number of Lily Brown's friends, pinpointing our age and
(08:32):
making derogatory comments towards us. And when you're just reporting
news at the end of the day and facts that
have been put out from a statement, I didn't quite
understand the complete hostility, and that account seemed to know
a lot about what was going on behind the scenes,
was really sticking up full Lily. So it was quite
interesting anyway. Moving on at number three, we have Ruby
(08:52):
Tuesday Matthews, who back in May was accused of sharing
an exploitative photo of her four year old son to
sell a hat for her and Roby. Now. Ruby got
her son Mars, to model in the marketing campaign at
a banana farm. Now in the photo, the four year
old was photographed shirtless in low slung pants standing next
to a box of bananas that said lady fingers. Now.
(09:14):
The backlash was swift, with people labeling the photo exploitative
and disgusting. Ruby was also accused of being ignorant to
the dangers of online predators. Now. Ruby addressed the concerns
on her Instagram story, claiming she had taken the photos
of her son on her iPhone and it wasn't a
staged photo shoot. This is despite Ruby tagging a professional
(09:34):
photographer in the photos and reels. For me, it doesn't
really change things. If she took the photo or the
photographer took the photo, there was still the choice to
publish these photos. I think she was trying to act
like it was just the way the kid happened to
be standing. It wasn't some sort of photo shoot where
he was instructed to stand in a certain way. Now.
Ruby then explained that they had visited her friend's banana
(09:56):
farm and that's just how Mars was wearing his outfit
that day. She so defended the images, saying I'd also
like to say, if you were sexualizing that image of him,
I think you actually need to have a look at
the bigger picture of what your issue is, and maybe
you have become so overly sensitive that the line is
blurred of what is wrong and what is right, and
(10:16):
there is nothing wrong with that image. Now, that was
really a sad turn of events because Ruby revealed that
she had been a victim of sexual assault at fourteen,
which has made her super aware and vigilant around the
content that she shares of her children. And she went
on to say that she could claim the backlash had
triggered her, but she's a little bigger than that. She
finished up by saying how soft she thinks society is
(10:37):
these days, and that the lines have been so blurred
that anything can be taken the wrong way. Now. Adam Whittington,
the CEO of a not for profit charity that fights
to end child trafficking and exploitation of children, weighed into
the matter, labeling the photos as total exploitation of the child.
He also said it happens every single time a so
called influencer gets caught up exploiting their own kids. They always, always,
(11:02):
always say, in response to the backlash, if you see
my child's image as sexual, you have the problem. You
need to look at your stick problems. They then send
trolls to make comments in support of their actions, or
call those genuinely trying to help them by educating them
trolls and haters. Now, coming in at third place, we
have the South Australian Tourism Commission's Influencer only event with
(11:23):
Sam Smith. Now, South Australians were left less than impressed
when they were not only excluded from being able to
attend the concert, but discovered their taxpayer funds we used
to pay for the exclusive event. Now as South Australians ourselves,
the state was in uproar. I was pissed off about this.
It was just such a bad look. So the invite
(11:44):
only event was Sam's only performance in Australia and the
first in South Australia since twenty fifteen. So in total,
three hundred people were invited and the Tourism Minister, Zoe
Bettison claimed one hundred and fifteen were competition winners, while
ninety were influences and media personalities and twenty one were
SATC staff Lucky SATC stuff getting a front row ticket
(12:06):
to that. Now, the event was supposed to attract national
and international exposure for the state through Sam's social channels
as well as the influencers. The problem was the Contra
deal offered by the government didn't attract big name influencers,
and furthermore, as the influencers were obligated to post, the
coverage was very minimal, with most of it disappearing after
(12:29):
twenty four hours. They were clearly banking on Sam Smith
sharing this to their account because they do have over
fourteen million followers. The only catch was the content that
they did share was of them outside McDonald's on South
Road and it was a glamorous spot. No because the
Tourism Commission they'd taken them to all of these fancy restaurants,
(12:53):
winder Stars, grease, wined and dined them and then that
was the photo that they chose to share them outside
this huge golden Arch sign. They literally could have been anywhere.
Now in March, the ABC obtained documents which revealed the
details of the deal the SATC struck with influencers to
get them to attend the event. So for some interstate influences,
(13:14):
the Contra deal included free flights, transfers, accommodation and meals,
with the commercial costs predicted at two thousand dollars per influencer. Now,
the SATC confirmed that they shared the cost for the
event with Frontier Touring, who was putting on Sam Smith's concert,
and in January, Tourism Minister Zoe Betterson said the Sam
Smith concert cost less than half a million dollars and
(13:36):
resulted in thirty two million dollars worth of advertising for
the state. This was despite the fact that a review
found that they had absolutely no way to measure the
influencer's return on investments. Yes, so the results of a
review into the handling of the event were revealed in May,
and it was found that the SATC needed a greater
level of transparency when choosing which influencers to engage with.
(13:59):
Sa also agreed to overhaul its policies about engaging with influences.
We also have to mention the fact that there was
a rogue pisser, so someone apparently pissed in the mosh pit.
This was being reported at the time. We still don't
know who that influencer is. Yeah, and also this was
the first event that Sophie Kaisha attended with her new girlfriend,
(14:21):
Sophie vander Hoovel, so Sophie actually shared vision of her
cuddling into the other Sophie at the Sam Smith concert
recently for Sophie's birthday. God, it must be so confusing
with them both being called Sophie. I'm called Sophie, and
when we're reporting on issues with Sophie Guidlin and Sophie Kasha,
it gets confusing. The amount of sophie is that are
flying around. Well, I think Sophie Kaysha calls her VD instead.
(14:46):
Now I feel like we need a drum roll because
coming in in top spot for Outspoken's Biggest Influencer scandal
of twenty twenty three is Emma Clair. So. In April,
she shocked the internet when she admitted to killing two
cats as a child. I can't believe this was in April.
This just feels like the other day now. The twenty
eight year old made the disgusting revelation on her newly
(15:07):
revamped podcast called Simply Chaotic, and the timing could not
have been worse for Emma, who had just given birth
to her first child a week earlier. Now. As a refresher,
Emma and her co host Kirsty had been sharing personal
secrets on the podcast. When Emma said, I've got one.
I killed my cat, but I promise I'm really good
with my animals. She then went on to say, I
(15:28):
didn't mean to I was young, I was a child.
I was swinging my cat around like I was thinking
it was just a stuff toy, and I accidentally let
go of it. That is really difficult to listen to again.
It is deeply disturbing. The incident that took place, and
the fact that she thinks that this is some sort
of fun secret to share on a podcast. Let's get
to know me better. Oh, I horrifically murdered a pet cat. Oh,
(15:51):
it is so disgusting. Emma did later confirm that the
cat died from fright rather than an injury, and she
also said her sister didn't speak to her for months
following the incident and that her mum was fucking fuming.
She would then went on to say, I'm giggling about
it now, but this happened years and years ago, and
like I was a fucking little child. Emma then finished
up by offhandly revealing that she also killed her best
(16:14):
friend's cat. For her to then reveal that this wasn't
an isolated incident and this has actually happened a second
time with another friend's cat, was just so deeply troubling. Yeah,
it really was. I just still can't believe that she
even recorded this, edited it, and then put it out
for the world to listener, and also used it as
a teaser to promote the episode. That's so true. This
(16:36):
wasn't live. This was said with a lot of hindsight,
and I just can't still get over it now. The
backlash was swift, causing Emma to share a statement. However,
rather than apologizing, she told her followers to chill and
said the story is a bit of light humor. She
also advised her audience to not listen to her podcast
if they couldn't handle the humor. She finished the statement
(16:57):
by writing again, sorry, not sorry for an hour accident
that happened over twenty years ago, and sorry not sorry
for having a giggle about it, because I think, still
twenty years on, I'm in shock by it now. Following
Emma's statement, multiple brands cut ties with her, including Lust
Minerals and MC beauty. A day later, Emmett had suddenly
(17:17):
changed her tune, apologizing for sharing the story and stating
that she was well aware that the story was not
light humor and in fact very serious. She also deleted
the story from her podcast, however, kept up the promotional
material that featured the story. She did end up leaving
social media shortly after the incident due to the apparent
bullying and death threats that she received. Before leaving the platform,
(17:39):
she said, the last nine weeks have been the toughest
of my life and my mental health has been destroyed.
Now she has stayed offline since then, I am wondering
if we will see her return this year. I am
really surprised Kate that Sarah's Day has not made the
top five scandals for this year. Well, if we were
doing a top ten, I was thinking of putting her
(18:00):
Sunny scandal in there, But I have noticed that she
really has taken a step back from really big scandals.
She's been wearing up to go though, since she has
shut down Sunny, so I feel like she may feature
next year. Yeah. I am really excited to see what
unfolds next year. Now, thank you so much for listening
to today's episode. If you have enjoyed it, could you
please make sure you do share across your stories. Yes,
(18:22):
and we do hope you have a wonderful New Year's
For Outspoken Plus subscribers, we will be counting down the
top five relationship dramas of twenty twenty three, so if
you are a subscriber and are looking for more content
to get you through the holiday period, it is a
great time to sign up now. This podcast was recorded
on the traditional land of the Ghana people of the
Adelaide Planes. We pay respect to elders past and present,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!