May 11, 2026 • 28 mins
Steph Claire Smith has been accused of misleading her audience, after not disclosing her partnership with a sleep consultant. The fitness mogul aired a 12-minute segment on her KicBump podcast about her experience with the consultant, but failed to disclose the service was gifted.
Doordash’s Mother’s Day campaign, featuring some of Australia’s biggest influencers, has gone viral. The campaign, aimed at addressing the ‘mental load’ mothers carry, even on days like Mother’s Day has already notched up over a million views.
Ruby Tuesday Matthews is the latest influencer to upgrade her engagement ring. Late last week, the 32-year-old, wowed her followers by sharing a photo of her new 12 carat rock. While she passed the newest bling off as an early Mother’s Day present, there is more to this story than meets the eye.
Subscribe to Outspoken Plus
Outspoken Plus is our subscription offering that gives you an extra dose of the hottest influencer and pop-culture news. Enjoy exclusive access to a BONUS episode every week.
A Outspoken Plus subscription costs $5.99 a month, or save with our annual package, for just $49.99 a year*.
You can became an Outspoken Plus subscriber via Apple Podcasts: apple.co/outspoken or via Spotify https://open.spotify.com/show/03t0cQyHS8OzAYigyksL9E?si=007ba128afd74369.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. Is your dose of the
hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm
Kate Torva and I'm Amy Torba and coming up on
today's show, Steph Claire Smith is accused of misleading her
audience after failing to disclose her partnership with a sleep consultant.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
And Ruby Tuesday Matthew's twelve Carrot marketing masterclass. The first
door Dasher's Mother's Day campaign, featuring some of Australia's biggest influences,
has gone viral. The campaign, aimed at addressing the mental
load mother's carrie even on days like Mother's Day, has
already notched up over a million views now. In the clip,
(00:38):
Indy Clinton is seen hosting a Mother's Day support group
with Beck Judd, Ash Pollard and Ronda Birchmore all in attendance.
Let's have a listen.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Hello, mothers.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
This is your seats feast everything from last Mother's Day.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
We are living in this room. Beck me, no gift, NUDDA.
I even go to sleep in on my first Mother's Day, and.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
After that there were no new babies for a.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
Very long time, if you know what I mean.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Oh, yeah, here to where it hurtssh, you look.
Speaker 4 (01:14):
Like you got something to share.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
I spent six Luma cycles playing a gift giving manifestation
taped to my daughters while they slept.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I ended up snapping the thing and buying my own flowers.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
I feel you.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
I can see how this notched up a million views
because it instantly sucked me in. It was such an
interesting collection of influences as well. They really hit the
nail on the head. I think it appealed to a
wide audience.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
And they were so good at acting, like especially beg Jards. Like,
I know they were playing themselves, but geez, she deserves
a low give her performance.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Yeah, I've noticed in a couple of clips recently what
a good actor she is, and I honestly think if
Neighbors were still around, they probably would have signed her
up by now.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Do you think they were actually taking real life in
spoth of this clip, Like did Chris Judd actually get
her nothing on her first line day?
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I actually think that was probably the one that was true.
I felt like there was a bit of method acting
in that. I mean, I hope Ronda Birchmore isn't catfishing
her daughter day how good was India Clinton. There are
a few people in the comments saying, oh my god,
I didn't realize it was you at the start because
your voice is so different, and she's like, well, duh.
Speaker 4 (02:16):
I was active, she was playing a role. She's the counselor. Guys.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
The only person I feel like that was missing from
this clip was Steph clas Smith. I feel like she
could have added a bit of value.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
Yes, she would have been a great inclusion. Ash Pollard
was bloody funny as well. I just think it was
just an all star performance And I would love to
know how much they got paid to do that ad.
Who do you think got paid the most? I'm guessing Indie.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Because she was the star of the clip.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
But the reason I.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Think that this video went so viral was because the
marketing team at door Dash hit the nail on the
head by asking other mums to talk about the disappointing
Mother's Day they had. So in the comments they said,
share with us the worst thing that you received on
Mother's Day, and that comments section was full.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Yes it was. It's funny.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
We spoke a lot about Mother's Day on our podcast,
The Mum's Group, so we did a bit of a
deep dive into the whole topic. We spoke about expectations,
because I think they've really shifted in the last couple
of years with TikTok. I think there's a lot of
pressure on mums to have a good Mother's Day, and
we spoke about how g Bungalow had come out with
(03:17):
a real listing everything that most mums would actually like
on Mother's Day, and controversially it included spending some time
away from your children and not visiting your in laws.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
I keep getting these videos popping up on my FU
page of these mum influencers who they're like. I can't
believe these women who are saying that they don't want
to see their kids on Mother's Day. It's such poor form.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
Where are we heading? Where are we going on that?
How was your Mother's Day? Did you see your child?
I did?
Speaker 2 (03:46):
I saw Harry the majority of the day.
Speaker 4 (03:48):
I did get a.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Little bit of a shopping trip in the afternoon with
Sophie which was really lovely. But Dale outdid himself. I
think all the boys were a bit scared after listening
to that Mother's Day episode that we did on them
Bums Group, and we're like shit, like, we better pull
out some good presents because all of the husbands did
an amazing job. So Dale got me a teddy bear
which was made out of Harry's old sleep suits, and
(04:11):
the bear weighs exactly what Harry weighed at birth.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
I can't believe. I picked up that bear and I
was like, surely he didn't weigh this. I suppose because
it's distributed differently. Yeah, it's from amazing, very much in the.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
Bear's bum, so it's very disproportionate. But it was so
lovely I didn't even know it was the thing. I've
heard of people getting blankets made with the sleep suits,
but not a bear.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
I have to say my husband also excelled. He got
me this really cute thing off Etsy. It was like
a wooden flower and you get your child.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
To do the handprint for the flower.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
And it was so cute because when I unwrapped it,
Jack was excitedly, oh my God, like he was telling
me about how he had done it at his own
Nannon pars. And then he also got me this jigsaw
puzzle or it was sort of like three little pieces
and their giraffes, because Jack loves giraffes and then he
got me some jumpers, so very spoilt. I just love
the sentimental gifts.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I feel like Brandon needs a shout out to the
Only disappointing thing is that none of the husband's actually
listened to outspoken, so they're not even going to hear
us praising them. But Brandon got Sophie this beautiful watch.
I think he tried to find one that looked like
a watch that Molly May has because he knows how
much Sophie loves Molly May. When she opened it, it
was set to the exact time that Luca was born,
and there was this beautiful note attached to anyway, it
(05:21):
was beautiful. So the boys really outdid themselves. We didn't
have any ammo to go on the door dash campaign
and added shit presence to the list.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
No, but I think that is just a sign that
if you haven't subscribed to the Mum's Group, make sure
you are subscribed, and also make you sure your husband's
subscribe and listen to that episode because all our husband's
had a cheeky listen and they nailed Mother's Day.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
So it's educational.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
And it just really goes to show that you can
upgrade and you can change and you can add.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Ruby Tuesday Matthews is the latest influencer to upgrade her
engagement ring. Late last week, the thirty two year old
wowed her followers by sharing a photo of her new
twelve carrot rock, while she passed the newest bling off
as an early Mother's Day present. There is more to
this story than meets the ik.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
I mean talk about putting our sentimental gifts to shame
right off the back now. As you can imagine, Ruby's
post went viral and at the time of recording, it's
attracted over ten thousand likes, one hundred and thirty comments,
and over seven and a half one thousand shares. Now,
alongside a photo of the eye watering rock, she wrote,
Happy Mother's Day to me. Came home from China to
an early surprise from Shannon and the kids, a twelve
(06:34):
point five to nine carrot diamond. I'd been quietly obsessed with.
Slight to the end for the full upgrade timeline, say
a man. Three engagement rings are still no wedding, but
I'm not mad about it.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
Love you, Doddsy. Ruby then shared a carousel of images
showing off the new ring, alongside her two other engagement rings.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
Now, the majority of commenters were in awe of the rock,
with many questioning how much it actually cost. One said,
oh my, is it true. It's worth over three million dollars.
If your man bought you a three million dollar ring, Dang,
you're doing something right. Another follower begged Ruby for her
fiance to have a word with hers, to which Ruby replied,
tell them to contact Dodsy at Tajua's Haha.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Now, first, I was so confused because the post was
in complete contradiction to that really relatable wedding update Ruby
shared back in February, so disper some background, Ruby has
been engaged for five years and she often receives a
lot of comments from followers asking when are you getting married,
And in response to that constant questioning, she told her
followers at the start of this year that she would
(07:35):
love to have a wedding, but she's currently saving for
home renovations and a pool, so it didn't really make
sense that she suddenly got this twelve carrot rock on
her hand. And another thing that threw me was the
fact that she was so specific about the carrots, because
normally when influencers show off their ring, they're a bit
you know, coy about how much it is you have
to go digging for that type of information. However, it
(07:57):
all makes sense when you discover the missing piece of
the puzzle. So it turns out that Ruby and her
fiance are founders of a Lab diamond jewelry brand called
to Jews, the very brand tagged in Ruby's post. So
it turns out the very impressive twelve car upgrade on
her finger is also an ad for her business. Yeah,
so to Juwa's Instagram account of course followed suit and
(08:18):
they posted their own promotion of Ruby's ring with the
caption twelve point five to nine carrot o'sharka custom cut.
I hope I'm pronouncing the name of that diamond right.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
Very hard to hand back once you've tried it on upgrade.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Now, I of course had a bit of a sticky
beak of to Jua's website to see if I could
find out how much this ring actually cost. And while
I couldn't find Ruby's exact ring because it was custom made,
I was actually quite taken aback about how inexpensive lab
diamonds are so back when I was looking at wedding
bands in twenty twenty two, I was told lab diamonds
(08:53):
were around a fourth of the price of a real diamond. However,
what I've discovered is over the last couple of years,
slab diamonds have become dramatically cheaper, especially if they're sold
directly to consumers online, like to Duas Douce. And the
reason why is because there's been this massive increase in
production capacity, particularly in India and China. So it's actually
(09:15):
estimated prices have dropped between sixty five to eighty percent
since twenty twenty, which means lab diamonds are around seventy
five to ninety percent cheaper than natural diamonds of the
same size and quality.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
Isn't that insane? Does that make you want them less?
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Though? I know that sounds crazy, but you know, the
appeal of a diamond is that it's an expensive rock,
It's a forever rock. I know these lab diamonds are
basically the same thing. But knowing that your ring, if
it's a lab diamond, is worth like ninety percent less
than a real diamond, I don't know is that does
that come into play for people?
Speaker 4 (09:50):
I mean, you've hit the nail on the head.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
There has been a massive shift in engagement ring culture
since lab diamonds have become more readily available, because now
as the norm to go on to Instagram and see
a post of your friends, who you assume earn the
same amount of money as you, flashing this incredible diamond
that you would only ever have seen on an airs's finger,
and you're like, hang on, how are you affording that?
(10:13):
But the irony is now when you see someone flashing
a massive rock as an engagement ring, you're like, oh,
it must be a lab diamond. Yeah, oh, it's not
actually a real diamond. And I'm wondering now if the
trend is going to be smaller engagement rings, because it
kind of proves that there are actual real diamonds. Like,
it's so interesting because I did a bit of a
price comparison. So a well cut, round natural one carrot
(10:35):
diamond will cost you around five to eight thousand dollars,
while a lab diamond of the same size is eight
hundred to one hundred dollars. And then when you're looking
at a three carrot natural diamond that would cost around
forty five to seventy five thousand. Now if you go
to lab diamond the same it would be around three
(10:55):
to eight sex.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
So how much is Ruby's ring meant to have cost
if it was a real diamond v.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
A lab So if it was real, my research says
it would have cost around five hundred thousand to two
million dollars. Now, based on two duras pricing, it most
likely costs around twenty to forty thousand dollars, so still
a very expensive ring. But because she is a founder
of the business, it's likely it didn't have any retail
marketing obviously, so she probably got it for a bit cheap.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
I think it comes down to, now, what type of
person you are like. If you like a big ring,
then lab diamonds are an amazing fit. But if you're
a bit more modest or you don't want a big
ring restricting your day to day life, obviously a smaller
ring is the way to go.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
What I find particularly interesting about this shift is it's
really challenging the marketing pillars that the diamond industry was
actually historically built on.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
It always reminds me of the movie How to Lose
a Guy.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
In Yourself, because back in nineteen forty seven, there was
this slogan a diamond is forever, and that is still
the most famous advertising campaign in history, and it was
so genius because it discouraged people reselling diamonds. And at
that time, the diamond industry really used Hollywood celebrities to
(12:08):
glamorize diamonds because diamonds actually weren't the done engagement ring,
like you could have other gemstones. But it was only
after that campaign that it was like, you must have
a diamond.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
And also, to put it in perspective, in nineteen forty seven,
not many people were getting divorced, so there wasn't a
big resale market for wedding and engagement rings.
Speaker 4 (12:26):
No exactly.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
But the interesting thing is it's now shifted from you know,
you had Hollywood celebrities glamorizing diamonds. Now we've got influences
like Ruby Tuesday Matthews who are pushing a completely opposite
marketing message, being that big diamonds now are accessible and
upgrades are the norms. And it makes a lot of
sense why we're seeing so many influencers upgrade their engagement rings.
(12:48):
I assumed it was because they had more money now
and they're like, oh, actually I'm going to get this
diamond that I want. But I think it's now a
sense of keeping up with what you're seeing online. So
now every day people are getting these massive rocks, and
some influencers like, hang on, I've got it.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
You know, I've got to compete. I want a big rock.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
It makes a lot of sense because people's taste changes
over time as well, So something you might have loved
when you were twenty five, suddenly you're like eugh, And
now these beautiful rings are so easily accessible. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Well, Ruby really played into this messaging on her Instagram story.
So a couple of days after she revealed her ring upgrade,
she then went on this ten minute spiel about how
Tajuas sourced her diamond and hats off to Ruby because
she nailed the marketing messaging. She said, it really goes
to show how you can upgrade, change, and add She
then said this.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
I think there's such huge stigma around. I wouldn't call
it like upgrading. I would call it just like updating
your engagement ring. Like we all grow, we all change,
relationships literally grow and change.
Speaker 6 (13:54):
But what I do.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Love is that every single one has a different story,
a different memory attached, a different meaning, Like this is
obviously the beginning of our relationship.
Speaker 4 (14:05):
You know, the most special ring to me, Well, this
is also the most special ring. I know they're all
freaking session.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
But I just think if you are in the market
or you're wanting to change your ring, don't change the original.
I suggest just getting something different and in the stand market,
if you find the right ruler to just or the
right supplier, you can definitely do that at a really
reasonable price and it's still hold you know, everything that
(14:34):
you wanted to hold. Okay, I have fat done.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I was so torn after watching Ruby's stories because her
rings were absolutely stunning, and it made me think like, oh,
this is a really cool idea, Like it makes sense
to if you have the means to upgrade your ring
and add to them, so it's not like you're getting
rid of your original one, you're just getting extra rings.
But there was a part of me that was like,
doesn't this deep in the whole thing? Because the way
(15:01):
she was showing off the rings, they kind of reminded
me of remember when Kim Kardashian got engaged to Chris
Humphries and she had that massive rock and then Diva
did rip off of it. It kind of reminded me
of that and I'm thinking I actually don't really like
the look of a diamond that big, Like to me,
it kind of looks tacky. And I do think that
(15:24):
this potentially could spark, as we mentioned earlier, a move
for smaller rings being more sheep.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Well, I actually think we might see people turning to
different types of stones as well. Yes, because I think
so too. Yeah, you know, there's there are so many
other beautiful rings that people could get, like emeralds, that
kind of thing, because there's so many question marks now
over diamonds, like oh is that real or is that lab?
Speaker 4 (15:47):
Or is that you know?
Speaker 1 (15:48):
I do want to point out to the women who
are listening who have natural diamond engagement rings, please don't despair,
because the boom in lab diamonds means natural diamonds are
actually holding more perceived so their prices haven't actually collapsed
in the same way that lab diamonds have. And I
think it's fair to say that natural diamonds are now
being viewed more like a rare luxury collectible, while lab
(16:11):
diamonds are kind of like your high quality luxury tech.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
So that's a trick. If you're listening and you're wanting
to propose and you want a lab diamond, don't go
to obscene just too.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
Yeah, Like that's a really good point. Just to a
one carrot, I'd go too.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
If you're doing libd all like one and a half.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Yeah, I think one and a half is a beautiful size.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
You've had a sleep consumption in your home?
Speaker 4 (16:35):
Are you done now?
Speaker 3 (16:37):
Yep?
Speaker 4 (16:37):
Yep, she's gone home.
Speaker 2 (16:39):
Stephan Glare Smith has been accused of misleading her audience
after not disclosing her partnership with a sleep consultant. The
fitness mogul aired a twelve minute segment on her kick
Bump podcast about her experience with the consultant, but failed
to disclose the service was gifted.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
A pretty crucial element of this segment. Do you think?
Speaker 1 (17:00):
I mean? It still baffles me that it was omitted
from the original podcast episode, particularly when you consider how
sensitive the topic of baby sleep and sleep training is.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
I just don't get it. I don't get it either.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
I listened to this podcast and I thoroughly enjoyed it,
and when I heard that this service was gifted, I
was like, what the hell? Why didn't you just mention
at the start? It's not like it's that big of
a deal to say. By the way, guys, I just
want to let you know this was a gifted service.
It's been really beneficial for me.
Speaker 5 (17:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
I mean, it would have.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Just been so simple, it would have flowed in conversation.
It wouldn't have been that startling considering that she is
an influence, so she's got over a million followers, and
I think you know, this topic was always going to
elicit a strong response from parents because sleep training is
quite controversial.
Speaker 4 (17:44):
But the lack of transparency was literally like waving a
red rag to a ball.
Speaker 1 (17:48):
I mean it was only after Steph shared a real
promoting the segment in collaboration with a Kickbump podcast that
the nature of the partnership was actually revealed. So a
follower commented under the video, can you confirm whether this
was a gifted service or not? I've seen numerous influences
promoting the same sleep consultant. Obviously there are ethical implications
if this is undisclosed promotion, especially when it comes to
(18:10):
something as sensitive as sleep training. Now, Steph replied saying,
of course Sarah's support was gifted, but there is absolutely
no way I would share or recommend it if it's
not something I would have paid for or didn't enjoy
anything I recommend on. Here is something I would recommend
to my closest friends offline. I'd never platform anything I
didn't genuinely stand by. Now, another follower replied, writing, it
(18:33):
is concerning that not once was dis mentioned in the podcast.
No doubt this breach A Triple C regulations.
Speaker 2 (18:39):
Now, in terms of the regulations, the A Triple C
has explicitly said influences need to disclose when they receive
free products, tickets, or any other gifts or incentives in
exchange for promotion. So this includes podcasts, advertising as well
as social media. And it's interesting because the whole premise
of the Kickbump episode was that Steph and Laura were
(19:01):
providing a very personal update to their audience about their
children's sleep. I mean it was literally called Steph and
Laura Unpack their nighttime Routines. And at the start of
the segment it sounded really legit because Steph mentioned that
this sleep consultant was recommended by her friend, who happens
to be fellow influencer jar Da Tunci.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
Yeah, and she went on.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
This spiel about how she wanted to share her experience
because Originally she thought it was a bit of a
weird concept to have someone come into your home and
stay there, but she was so glad that she did
it because her daughter Billy now sleeps twelve hours overnight
and the review was absolutely glowing. She also went into
depth about other services that the sleep a consultant office,
(19:42):
so you can do an in home thing, you can
do an over the phone console.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
Maybe that should have been a red flag when we
heard that another influencer had recommended, like I love Jarde Tunci,
but the fact that someone like that had recommended it
makes you think, oh, well, she obviously got that gifted
too well.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
That the sleep consultant in question is swoop Baby, and
I am very familiar with them because literally every influencer
talks about them. So it was only fairly recently that
Sarah's Day had Sarah from sweet Baby stat a house.
Laurence Simpson has also spoken about her, and it was
a couple of years ago that Indy Clinton spoke about
using sweet Baby for her daughter Bambi, and at the
(20:19):
time she had to come out and say, actually, no.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
I paid for the service.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
But there's a few question marks over the other influences
and what their relationship was. I can see why there
was a lot of confusion because, in my opinion, this endorsement,
and that's what it was, an endorsement, was really cleverly
weaved into an editorial style conversation, so it came across
as this very authentic and personal opinion from Steph rather
(20:44):
than advertising.
Speaker 4 (20:45):
And that's why people are upset.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
Because this type of conduct is considered particularly problematic by
the A Triple C because it is very misleading. And
when determining a breach, the A Triple C consider whether
a reasonable listener would assume the endorsement was completely independent
and unpaid. Now, Amy, I would consider us to be
quite savvy in the influence that and marketing space, and
(21:09):
I didn't even think this must be No, I'm just assumed.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
That she paid for it herself.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
No, as you said, it came across as just she
was telling a story about everyday life. You would never
have assumed that she was gifted the service.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Yeah, And if the A Triple C were to investigate this,
another thing that they would try and determine is whether
the sleep consultant service was provided with the expectation of
publicity or promotion. So that's something that we can't determine ourselves.
But if the answer to both of those questions is yes,
then STEP's conduct could be considered misleading or deceptive under
(21:43):
Australian consumer law. It's important to note though, the A
Triple C act only as watchdogs, so they can investigate
someone's conduct and they can issue warnings and infringements and
take someone to court, but they don't actually have the power,
from a legal sense, to determine whether someone broke the law.
That determination is normally made by a court. So recently
(22:05):
we spoke on the podcast about how the A Triple
C had issued this unprecedented fine against a photobook company.
Now that actually didn't go to court, that was just
an infringement that the A Triple C passed on to
the advertiser. So if Steph does get investigated, she potentially
(22:26):
could be fined as well as Sweet Baby.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
That's what's crazy about this whole story is that the
A Triple C has been in the headlines recently. It's
a front and center of people's minds that influencers are
running the risk of being fined large amounts of money.
And also these different companies, So while I'd love to
give Steph the benefit of the doubt because I know
she's a hard working mum. I don't know if she
specifically went out there to manipulate people or pull the
(22:53):
wall over their eyes. I don't know if she went
out there purposely to mislead people. But surely there are
members of the Kick team that would have known about
this story. There's producers that oversee this no state. Did
anyone think, wait a sec, maybe we should mention that
this was gifted? Were the team aware that this was gifted?
Speaker 4 (23:10):
I mean, there's also an onus on the brand.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
They also need to operate under the A Triple c's guidelines.
It was interesting because Steph responded to the follower who
accused her of breaching the A Triple C's regulations, and
she wrote, Hello, appreciate you reminding me of this, and
I'd like to apologize to anyone who may have felt
misled in any way. There was a line in the
podcast description that, upon reflection, was not clear enough. We
(23:33):
have updated this now, and then she put in brackets
may take time to update.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Across all apps.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
And I've also recorded a paragraph to be embedded in
the episode audio itself. Which our producer is updating now.
Thank you again, I of course will be much more
conscious of this moving forward now. The podcast episode blurb
was updated to include the following disclosure, which read disclosure
Steph worked with Sarah from Sweet Baby. This service was gifted,
but all opinions are her own, and then this audio
(24:00):
was inserted into the episode.
Speaker 5 (24:03):
Hey guys, just a heads up from me, full disclosure.
Sarah's service was gifted and whilst there was no requirement
for me to post in return for the service, I
wanted to be transparent about that. All opinions I share
are of course my own, and I would never recommend
or share anything regardless of whether it was paid for
or not. That I wouldn't recommend to my closest friends
offline or pay for myself.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
I just wanted to make that really clear.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
Look, I think it's good that they tried to correct
the issue once concerns were raised, But from a podcasting perspective,
most of the downloads happen the first day of the
podcast is aired, and once an episode is downloaded, you
have to manually update it in order to get the
refreshed version. I mean, we've had that issue where we've
(24:49):
had an aera in the podcast, and when I damn it,
most people are going to hear it with the error,
even if you've re uploaded a new version, so I
think a lot of the damage would have already been
It'll be.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
Interesting to see if they address it in their new
kick Bump episode. Now that might be out by the
time this episode drops. I'm guessing maybe they will, or
if they do, it shows you how panicked they are
about it.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
I don't think they will because they pre record episodes.
I mean, I suppose they could jump in and, you know,
insert something into it.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
But it will be interesting. I mean, the thing is,
even though they've.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Tried to correct it, it doesn't actually necessarily erase the
original issue. I think that a Triple c will probably
still investigate it. I personally thought the response from Steph
was quite poor, being like, oh, oh, thank you for
bringing it to my attention. It's like you've been an
influencer for ten years, you know, the recent a Triple
(25:43):
CEE ruling has been in the headlines, like it's your
job as an influencer to know what the guidelines are
that you need to follow.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
I actually don't think it was that bad because I
think a lot of influencers, and kay, I'm sure you
can think of a few they just wouldn't have responded
to the comment and would have just left it how
it was, at least gone and said, look, I did
the wrong thing, I'm sorry. She apologized, and then it's
gone to rectify the issue.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Look, I agree that I think her response since the
issue was pointed out was good, but I'm sorry. It's
a complete cop out to say, oh, well, you know,
at least she apologized over it. Well, at least she
apologized for potentially being deceptive. I mean, I think it's
quite unethical when you consider that the target audience is
new parents who will literally do anything to get sleep.
So you're promoting this service that might, i add, costs
(26:29):
thousands of dollars. So when I looked into it, a
remote package from this sleep consultant costs one two hundred dollars. Now,
if you do the in home package that Steph was gifted,
it's one thousand, six hundred and fifty dollars a night,
four thousand, five hundred for three nights, and six seven
hundred and fifty for five nights. So that is a
(26:49):
lot of financial gain that Steph is getting from that
sleep consultant.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Steph's a multimillionaire, Like that's nothing for her, Like she
could afford to do that herself. The person that's actually
gaining is the sleep consultant. That's the person who has
probably got a lot of value out of this podcast episode.
That's why I'm so confused by it, Like why wouldn't
Steph just disclose it is this Like she's just dropped
the ball.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
But doesn't that make it worse.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
If you're a multimillionaire who could just afford to pay
for this service, then why have you slipped it into
your podcast and potentially have been misleading to a vulnerable audience.
I mean, also, the fact is most of the people
listening wouldn't be able to afford this service.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
I just think it shows the lack of care from
influencers in regards to the A Triple c's rules, Like
I don't think that they even take it on board
some of them. I just think it's this that I
don't think that they think anything serious will happen.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
But that's not true.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
As we've seen in recent times, there are going to
be a lot of influencers who are copying huge fines
for careless errors like this.
Speaker 4 (27:48):
Well, that is where we're going to leave things today.
Speaker 6 (27:50):
But if you want to hear more from us, we
drop a subscriber only episode every Thursday for our Outspoken
Plus subscribers. If you want to sign up, it's just
five ninety nine a month. All the details to sign
up in our show notes. We also have a second
podcast called The mums Group, so if you want to
listen to that that drops on a Wednesday. Just search
the mums Group on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you
(28:12):
listen to podcasts.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
This podcast was recorded on the.
Speaker 6 (28:15):
Traditional land of the Ghana people of the Adelaide Planes.
We pay respect to elders past and present.
Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. Is your dose of the
hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm
Kate Torva and I'm Amy Torba and coming up on
today's show, Steph Claire Smith is accused of misleading her
audience after failing to disclose her partnership with a sleep consultant.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
And Ruby Tuesday Matthew's twelve Carrot marketing masterclass. The first
door Dasher's Mother's Day campaign, featuring some of Australia's biggest influences,
has gone viral. The campaign, aimed at addressing the mental
load mother's carrie even on days like Mother's Day, has
already notched up over a million views now. In the clip,
(00:38):
Indy Clinton is seen hosting a Mother's Day support group
with Beck Judd, Ash Pollard and Ronda Birchmore all in attendance.
Let's have a listen.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Hello, mothers.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
This is your seats feast everything from last Mother's Day.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
We are living in this room. Beck me, no gift, NUDDA.
I even go to sleep in on my first Mother's Day, and.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
After that there were no new babies for a.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
Very long time, if you know what I mean.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Oh, yeah, here to where it hurtssh, you look.
Speaker 4 (01:14):
Like you got something to share.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
I spent six Luma cycles playing a gift giving manifestation
taped to my daughters while they slept.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I ended up snapping the thing and buying my own flowers.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
I feel you.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
I can see how this notched up a million views
because it instantly sucked me in. It was such an
interesting collection of influences as well. They really hit the
nail on the head. I think it appealed to a
wide audience.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
And they were so good at acting, like especially beg Jards. Like,
I know they were playing themselves, but geez, she deserves
a low give her performance.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
Yeah, I've noticed in a couple of clips recently what
a good actor she is, and I honestly think if
Neighbors were still around, they probably would have signed her
up by now.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Do you think they were actually taking real life in
spoth of this clip, Like did Chris Judd actually get
her nothing on her first line day?
Speaker 1 (02:00):
I actually think that was probably the one that was true.
I felt like there was a bit of method acting
in that. I mean, I hope Ronda Birchmore isn't catfishing
her daughter day how good was India Clinton. There are
a few people in the comments saying, oh my god,
I didn't realize it was you at the start because
your voice is so different, and she's like, well, duh.
Speaker 4 (02:16):
I was active, she was playing a role. She's the counselor. Guys.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
The only person I feel like that was missing from
this clip was Steph clas Smith. I feel like she
could have added a bit of value.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
Yes, she would have been a great inclusion. Ash Pollard
was bloody funny as well. I just think it was
just an all star performance And I would love to
know how much they got paid to do that ad.
Who do you think got paid the most? I'm guessing Indie.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Because she was the star of the clip.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
But the reason I.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Think that this video went so viral was because the
marketing team at door Dash hit the nail on the
head by asking other mums to talk about the disappointing
Mother's Day they had. So in the comments they said,
share with us the worst thing that you received on
Mother's Day, and that comments section was full.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Yes it was. It's funny.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
We spoke a lot about Mother's Day on our podcast,
The Mum's Group, so we did a bit of a
deep dive into the whole topic. We spoke about expectations,
because I think they've really shifted in the last couple
of years with TikTok. I think there's a lot of
pressure on mums to have a good Mother's Day, and
we spoke about how g Bungalow had come out with
(03:17):
a real listing everything that most mums would actually like
on Mother's Day, and controversially it included spending some time
away from your children and not visiting your in laws.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
I keep getting these videos popping up on my FU
page of these mum influencers who they're like. I can't
believe these women who are saying that they don't want
to see their kids on Mother's Day. It's such poor form.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
Where are we heading? Where are we going on that?
How was your Mother's Day? Did you see your child?
I did?
Speaker 2 (03:46):
I saw Harry the majority of the day.
Speaker 4 (03:48):
I did get a.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Little bit of a shopping trip in the afternoon with
Sophie which was really lovely. But Dale outdid himself. I
think all the boys were a bit scared after listening
to that Mother's Day episode that we did on them
Bums Group, and we're like shit, like, we better pull
out some good presents because all of the husbands did
an amazing job. So Dale got me a teddy bear
which was made out of Harry's old sleep suits, and
(04:11):
the bear weighs exactly what Harry weighed at birth.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
I can't believe. I picked up that bear and I
was like, surely he didn't weigh this. I suppose because
it's distributed differently. Yeah, it's from amazing, very much in the.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
Bear's bum, so it's very disproportionate. But it was so
lovely I didn't even know it was the thing. I've
heard of people getting blankets made with the sleep suits,
but not a bear.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
I have to say my husband also excelled. He got
me this really cute thing off Etsy. It was like
a wooden flower and you get your child.
Speaker 4 (04:38):
To do the handprint for the flower.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
And it was so cute because when I unwrapped it,
Jack was excitedly, oh my God, like he was telling
me about how he had done it at his own
Nannon pars. And then he also got me this jigsaw
puzzle or it was sort of like three little pieces
and their giraffes, because Jack loves giraffes and then he
got me some jumpers, so very spoilt. I just love
the sentimental gifts.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I feel like Brandon needs a shout out to the
Only disappointing thing is that none of the husband's actually
listened to outspoken, so they're not even going to hear
us praising them. But Brandon got Sophie this beautiful watch.
I think he tried to find one that looked like
a watch that Molly May has because he knows how
much Sophie loves Molly May. When she opened it, it
was set to the exact time that Luca was born,
and there was this beautiful note attached to anyway, it
(05:21):
was beautiful. So the boys really outdid themselves. We didn't
have any ammo to go on the door dash campaign
and added shit presence to the list.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
No, but I think that is just a sign that
if you haven't subscribed to the Mum's Group, make sure
you are subscribed, and also make you sure your husband's
subscribe and listen to that episode because all our husband's
had a cheeky listen and they nailed Mother's Day.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
So it's educational.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
And it just really goes to show that you can
upgrade and you can change and you can add.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
Ruby Tuesday Matthews is the latest influencer to upgrade her
engagement ring. Late last week, the thirty two year old
wowed her followers by sharing a photo of her new
twelve carrot rock, while she passed the newest bling off
as an early Mother's Day present. There is more to
this story than meets the ik.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
I mean talk about putting our sentimental gifts to shame
right off the back now. As you can imagine, Ruby's
post went viral and at the time of recording, it's
attracted over ten thousand likes, one hundred and thirty comments,
and over seven and a half one thousand shares. Now,
alongside a photo of the eye watering rock, she wrote,
Happy Mother's Day to me. Came home from China to
an early surprise from Shannon and the kids, a twelve
(06:34):
point five to nine carrot diamond. I'd been quietly obsessed with.
Slight to the end for the full upgrade timeline, say
a man. Three engagement rings are still no wedding, but
I'm not mad about it.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
Love you, Doddsy. Ruby then shared a carousel of images
showing off the new ring, alongside her two other engagement rings.
Speaker 2 (06:52):
Now, the majority of commenters were in awe of the rock,
with many questioning how much it actually cost. One said,
oh my, is it true. It's worth over three million dollars.
If your man bought you a three million dollar ring, Dang,
you're doing something right. Another follower begged Ruby for her
fiance to have a word with hers, to which Ruby replied,
tell them to contact Dodsy at Tajua's Haha.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Now, first, I was so confused because the post was
in complete contradiction to that really relatable wedding update Ruby
shared back in February, so disper some background, Ruby has
been engaged for five years and she often receives a
lot of comments from followers asking when are you getting married,
And in response to that constant questioning, she told her
followers at the start of this year that she would
(07:35):
love to have a wedding, but she's currently saving for
home renovations and a pool, so it didn't really make
sense that she suddenly got this twelve carrot rock on
her hand. And another thing that threw me was the
fact that she was so specific about the carrots, because
normally when influencers show off their ring, they're a bit
you know, coy about how much it is you have
to go digging for that type of information. However, it
(07:57):
all makes sense when you discover the missing piece of
the puzzle. So it turns out that Ruby and her
fiance are founders of a Lab diamond jewelry brand called
to Jews, the very brand tagged in Ruby's post. So
it turns out the very impressive twelve car upgrade on
her finger is also an ad for her business. Yeah,
so to Juwa's Instagram account of course followed suit and
(08:18):
they posted their own promotion of Ruby's ring with the
caption twelve point five to nine carrot o'sharka custom cut.
I hope I'm pronouncing the name of that diamond right.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
Very hard to hand back once you've tried it on upgrade.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Now, I of course had a bit of a sticky
beak of to Jua's website to see if I could
find out how much this ring actually cost. And while
I couldn't find Ruby's exact ring because it was custom made,
I was actually quite taken aback about how inexpensive lab
diamonds are so back when I was looking at wedding
bands in twenty twenty two, I was told lab diamonds
(08:53):
were around a fourth of the price of a real diamond. However,
what I've discovered is over the last couple of years,
slab diamonds have become dramatically cheaper, especially if they're sold
directly to consumers online, like to Duas Douce. And the
reason why is because there's been this massive increase in
production capacity, particularly in India and China. So it's actually
(09:15):
estimated prices have dropped between sixty five to eighty percent
since twenty twenty, which means lab diamonds are around seventy
five to ninety percent cheaper than natural diamonds of the
same size and quality.
Speaker 4 (09:27):
Isn't that insane? Does that make you want them less?
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Though? I know that sounds crazy, but you know, the
appeal of a diamond is that it's an expensive rock,
It's a forever rock. I know these lab diamonds are
basically the same thing. But knowing that your ring, if
it's a lab diamond, is worth like ninety percent less
than a real diamond, I don't know is that does
that come into play for people?
Speaker 4 (09:50):
I mean, you've hit the nail on the head.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
There has been a massive shift in engagement ring culture
since lab diamonds have become more readily available, because now
as the norm to go on to Instagram and see
a post of your friends, who you assume earn the
same amount of money as you, flashing this incredible diamond
that you would only ever have seen on an airs's finger,
and you're like, hang on, how are you affording that?
(10:13):
But the irony is now when you see someone flashing
a massive rock as an engagement ring, you're like, oh,
it must be a lab diamond. Yeah, oh, it's not
actually a real diamond. And I'm wondering now if the
trend is going to be smaller engagement rings, because it
kind of proves that there are actual real diamonds. Like,
it's so interesting because I did a bit of a
price comparison. So a well cut, round natural one carrot
(10:35):
diamond will cost you around five to eight thousand dollars,
while a lab diamond of the same size is eight
hundred to one hundred dollars. And then when you're looking
at a three carrot natural diamond that would cost around
forty five to seventy five thousand. Now if you go
to lab diamond the same it would be around three
(10:55):
to eight sex.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
So how much is Ruby's ring meant to have cost
if it was a real diamond v.
Speaker 1 (11:00):
A lab So if it was real, my research says
it would have cost around five hundred thousand to two
million dollars. Now, based on two duras pricing, it most
likely costs around twenty to forty thousand dollars, so still
a very expensive ring. But because she is a founder
of the business, it's likely it didn't have any retail
marketing obviously, so she probably got it for a bit cheap.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
I think it comes down to, now, what type of
person you are like. If you like a big ring,
then lab diamonds are an amazing fit. But if you're
a bit more modest or you don't want a big
ring restricting your day to day life, obviously a smaller
ring is the way to go.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
What I find particularly interesting about this shift is it's
really challenging the marketing pillars that the diamond industry was
actually historically built on.
Speaker 4 (11:44):
It always reminds me of the movie How to Lose
a Guy.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
In Yourself, because back in nineteen forty seven, there was
this slogan a diamond is forever, and that is still
the most famous advertising campaign in history, and it was
so genius because it discouraged people reselling diamonds. And at
that time, the diamond industry really used Hollywood celebrities to
(12:08):
glamorize diamonds because diamonds actually weren't the done engagement ring,
like you could have other gemstones. But it was only
after that campaign that it was like, you must have
a diamond.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
And also, to put it in perspective, in nineteen forty seven,
not many people were getting divorced, so there wasn't a
big resale market for wedding and engagement rings.
Speaker 4 (12:26):
No exactly.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
But the interesting thing is it's now shifted from you know,
you had Hollywood celebrities glamorizing diamonds. Now we've got influences
like Ruby Tuesday Matthews who are pushing a completely opposite
marketing message, being that big diamonds now are accessible and
upgrades are the norms. And it makes a lot of
sense why we're seeing so many influencers upgrade their engagement rings.
(12:48):
I assumed it was because they had more money now
and they're like, oh, actually I'm going to get this
diamond that I want. But I think it's now a
sense of keeping up with what you're seeing online. So
now every day people are getting these massive rocks, and
some influencers like, hang on, I've got it.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
You know, I've got to compete. I want a big rock.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
It makes a lot of sense because people's taste changes
over time as well, So something you might have loved
when you were twenty five, suddenly you're like eugh, And
now these beautiful rings are so easily accessible. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Well, Ruby really played into this messaging on her Instagram story.
So a couple of days after she revealed her ring upgrade,
she then went on this ten minute spiel about how
Tajuas sourced her diamond and hats off to Ruby because
she nailed the marketing messaging. She said, it really goes
to show how you can upgrade, change, and add She
then said this.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
I think there's such huge stigma around. I wouldn't call
it like upgrading. I would call it just like updating
your engagement ring. Like we all grow, we all change,
relationships literally grow and change.
Speaker 6 (13:54):
But what I do.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Love is that every single one has a different story,
a different memory attached, a different meaning, Like this is
obviously the beginning of our relationship.
Speaker 4 (14:05):
You know, the most special ring to me, Well, this
is also the most special ring. I know they're all
freaking session.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
But I just think if you are in the market
or you're wanting to change your ring, don't change the original.
I suggest just getting something different and in the stand market,
if you find the right ruler to just or the
right supplier, you can definitely do that at a really
reasonable price and it's still hold you know, everything that
(14:34):
you wanted to hold. Okay, I have fat done.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I was so torn after watching Ruby's stories because her
rings were absolutely stunning, and it made me think like, oh,
this is a really cool idea, Like it makes sense
to if you have the means to upgrade your ring
and add to them, so it's not like you're getting
rid of your original one, you're just getting extra rings.
But there was a part of me that was like,
doesn't this deep in the whole thing? Because the way
(15:01):
she was showing off the rings, they kind of reminded
me of remember when Kim Kardashian got engaged to Chris
Humphries and she had that massive rock and then Diva
did rip off of it. It kind of reminded me
of that and I'm thinking I actually don't really like
the look of a diamond that big, Like to me,
it kind of looks tacky. And I do think that
(15:24):
this potentially could spark, as we mentioned earlier, a move
for smaller rings being more sheep.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Well, I actually think we might see people turning to
different types of stones as well. Yes, because I think
so too. Yeah, you know, there's there are so many
other beautiful rings that people could get, like emeralds, that
kind of thing, because there's so many question marks now
over diamonds, like oh is that real or is that lab?
Speaker 4 (15:47):
Or is that you know?
Speaker 1 (15:48):
I do want to point out to the women who
are listening who have natural diamond engagement rings, please don't despair,
because the boom in lab diamonds means natural diamonds are
actually holding more perceived so their prices haven't actually collapsed
in the same way that lab diamonds have. And I
think it's fair to say that natural diamonds are now
being viewed more like a rare luxury collectible, while lab
(16:11):
diamonds are kind of like your high quality luxury tech.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
So that's a trick. If you're listening and you're wanting
to propose and you want a lab diamond, don't go
to obscene just too.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
Yeah, Like that's a really good point. Just to a
one carrot, I'd go too.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
If you're doing libd all like one and a half.
Speaker 4 (16:29):
Yeah, I think one and a half is a beautiful size.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
You've had a sleep consumption in your home?
Speaker 4 (16:35):
Are you done now?
Speaker 3 (16:37):
Yep?
Speaker 4 (16:37):
Yep, she's gone home.
Speaker 2 (16:39):
Stephan Glare Smith has been accused of misleading her audience
after not disclosing her partnership with a sleep consultant. The
fitness mogul aired a twelve minute segment on her kick
Bump podcast about her experience with the consultant, but failed
to disclose the service was gifted.
Speaker 4 (16:56):
A pretty crucial element of this segment. Do you think?
Speaker 1 (17:00):
I mean? It still baffles me that it was omitted
from the original podcast episode, particularly when you consider how
sensitive the topic of baby sleep and sleep training is.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
I just don't get it. I don't get it either.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
I listened to this podcast and I thoroughly enjoyed it,
and when I heard that this service was gifted, I
was like, what the hell? Why didn't you just mention
at the start? It's not like it's that big of
a deal to say. By the way, guys, I just
want to let you know this was a gifted service.
It's been really beneficial for me.
Speaker 5 (17:26):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
I mean, it would have.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Just been so simple, it would have flowed in conversation.
It wouldn't have been that startling considering that she is
an influence, so she's got over a million followers, and
I think you know, this topic was always going to
elicit a strong response from parents because sleep training is
quite controversial.
Speaker 4 (17:44):
But the lack of transparency was literally like waving a
red rag to a ball.
Speaker 1 (17:48):
I mean it was only after Steph shared a real
promoting the segment in collaboration with a Kickbump podcast that
the nature of the partnership was actually revealed. So a
follower commented under the video, can you confirm whether this
was a gifted service or not? I've seen numerous influences
promoting the same sleep consultant. Obviously there are ethical implications
if this is undisclosed promotion, especially when it comes to
(18:10):
something as sensitive as sleep training. Now, Steph replied saying,
of course Sarah's support was gifted, but there is absolutely
no way I would share or recommend it if it's
not something I would have paid for or didn't enjoy
anything I recommend on. Here is something I would recommend
to my closest friends offline. I'd never platform anything I
didn't genuinely stand by. Now, another follower replied, writing, it
(18:33):
is concerning that not once was dis mentioned in the podcast.
No doubt this breach A Triple C regulations.
Speaker 2 (18:39):
Now, in terms of the regulations, the A Triple C
has explicitly said influences need to disclose when they receive
free products, tickets, or any other gifts or incentives in
exchange for promotion. So this includes podcasts, advertising as well
as social media. And it's interesting because the whole premise
of the Kickbump episode was that Steph and Laura were
(19:01):
providing a very personal update to their audience about their
children's sleep. I mean it was literally called Steph and
Laura Unpack their nighttime Routines. And at the start of
the segment it sounded really legit because Steph mentioned that
this sleep consultant was recommended by her friend, who happens
to be fellow influencer jar Da Tunci.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
Yeah, and she went on.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
This spiel about how she wanted to share her experience
because Originally she thought it was a bit of a
weird concept to have someone come into your home and
stay there, but she was so glad that she did
it because her daughter Billy now sleeps twelve hours overnight
and the review was absolutely glowing. She also went into
depth about other services that the sleep a consultant office,
(19:42):
so you can do an in home thing, you can
do an over the phone console.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
Maybe that should have been a red flag when we
heard that another influencer had recommended, like I love Jarde Tunci,
but the fact that someone like that had recommended it
makes you think, oh, well, she obviously got that gifted
too well.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
That the sleep consultant in question is swoop Baby, and
I am very familiar with them because literally every influencer
talks about them. So it was only fairly recently that
Sarah's Day had Sarah from sweet Baby stat a house.
Laurence Simpson has also spoken about her, and it was
a couple of years ago that Indy Clinton spoke about
using sweet Baby for her daughter Bambi, and at the
(20:19):
time she had to come out and say, actually, no.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
I paid for the service.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
But there's a few question marks over the other influences
and what their relationship was. I can see why there
was a lot of confusion because, in my opinion, this endorsement,
and that's what it was, an endorsement, was really cleverly
weaved into an editorial style conversation, so it came across
as this very authentic and personal opinion from Steph rather
(20:44):
than advertising.
Speaker 4 (20:45):
And that's why people are upset.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
Because this type of conduct is considered particularly problematic by
the A Triple C because it is very misleading. And
when determining a breach, the A Triple C consider whether
a reasonable listener would assume the endorsement was completely independent
and unpaid. Now, Amy, I would consider us to be
quite savvy in the influence that and marketing space, and
(21:09):
I didn't even think this must be No, I'm just assumed.
Speaker 4 (21:12):
That she paid for it herself.
Speaker 2 (21:14):
No, as you said, it came across as just she
was telling a story about everyday life. You would never
have assumed that she was gifted the service.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Yeah, And if the A Triple C were to investigate this,
another thing that they would try and determine is whether
the sleep consultant service was provided with the expectation of
publicity or promotion. So that's something that we can't determine ourselves.
But if the answer to both of those questions is yes,
then STEP's conduct could be considered misleading or deceptive under
(21:43):
Australian consumer law. It's important to note though, the A
Triple C act only as watchdogs, so they can investigate
someone's conduct and they can issue warnings and infringements and
take someone to court, but they don't actually have the power,
from a legal sense, to determine whether someone broke the law.
That determination is normally made by a court. So recently
(22:05):
we spoke on the podcast about how the A Triple
C had issued this unprecedented fine against a photobook company.
Now that actually didn't go to court, that was just
an infringement that the A Triple C passed on to
the advertiser. So if Steph does get investigated, she potentially
(22:26):
could be fined as well as Sweet Baby.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
That's what's crazy about this whole story is that the
A Triple C has been in the headlines recently. It's
a front and center of people's minds that influencers are
running the risk of being fined large amounts of money.
And also these different companies, So while I'd love to
give Steph the benefit of the doubt because I know
she's a hard working mum. I don't know if she
specifically went out there to manipulate people or pull the
(22:53):
wall over their eyes. I don't know if she went
out there purposely to mislead people. But surely there are
members of the Kick team that would have known about
this story. There's producers that oversee this no state. Did
anyone think, wait a sec, maybe we should mention that
this was gifted? Were the team aware that this was gifted?
Speaker 4 (23:10):
I mean, there's also an onus on the brand.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
They also need to operate under the A Triple c's guidelines.
It was interesting because Steph responded to the follower who
accused her of breaching the A Triple C's regulations, and
she wrote, Hello, appreciate you reminding me of this, and
I'd like to apologize to anyone who may have felt
misled in any way. There was a line in the
podcast description that, upon reflection, was not clear enough. We
(23:33):
have updated this now, and then she put in brackets
may take time to update.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Across all apps.
Speaker 1 (23:37):
And I've also recorded a paragraph to be embedded in
the episode audio itself. Which our producer is updating now.
Thank you again, I of course will be much more
conscious of this moving forward now. The podcast episode blurb
was updated to include the following disclosure, which read disclosure
Steph worked with Sarah from Sweet Baby. This service was gifted,
but all opinions are her own, and then this audio
(24:00):
was inserted into the episode.
Speaker 5 (24:03):
Hey guys, just a heads up from me, full disclosure.
Sarah's service was gifted and whilst there was no requirement
for me to post in return for the service, I
wanted to be transparent about that. All opinions I share
are of course my own, and I would never recommend
or share anything regardless of whether it was paid for
or not. That I wouldn't recommend to my closest friends
offline or pay for myself.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
I just wanted to make that really clear.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
Look, I think it's good that they tried to correct
the issue once concerns were raised, But from a podcasting perspective,
most of the downloads happen the first day of the
podcast is aired, and once an episode is downloaded, you
have to manually update it in order to get the
refreshed version. I mean, we've had that issue where we've
(24:49):
had an aera in the podcast, and when I damn it,
most people are going to hear it with the error,
even if you've re uploaded a new version, so I
think a lot of the damage would have already been
It'll be.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
Interesting to see if they address it in their new
kick Bump episode. Now that might be out by the
time this episode drops. I'm guessing maybe they will, or
if they do, it shows you how panicked they are
about it.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
I don't think they will because they pre record episodes.
I mean, I suppose they could jump in and, you know,
insert something into it.
Speaker 4 (25:19):
But it will be interesting. I mean, the thing is,
even though they've.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Tried to correct it, it doesn't actually necessarily erase the
original issue. I think that a Triple c will probably
still investigate it. I personally thought the response from Steph
was quite poor, being like, oh, oh, thank you for
bringing it to my attention. It's like you've been an
influencer for ten years, you know, the recent a Triple
(25:43):
CEE ruling has been in the headlines, like it's your
job as an influencer to know what the guidelines are
that you need to follow.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
I actually don't think it was that bad because I
think a lot of influencers, and kay, I'm sure you
can think of a few they just wouldn't have responded
to the comment and would have just left it how
it was, at least gone and said, look, I did
the wrong thing, I'm sorry. She apologized, and then it's
gone to rectify the issue.
Speaker 1 (26:05):
Look, I agree that I think her response since the
issue was pointed out was good, but I'm sorry. It's
a complete cop out to say, oh, well, you know,
at least she apologized over it. Well, at least she
apologized for potentially being deceptive. I mean, I think it's
quite unethical when you consider that the target audience is
new parents who will literally do anything to get sleep.
So you're promoting this service that might, i add, costs
(26:29):
thousands of dollars. So when I looked into it, a
remote package from this sleep consultant costs one two hundred dollars. Now,
if you do the in home package that Steph was gifted,
it's one thousand, six hundred and fifty dollars a night,
four thousand, five hundred for three nights, and six seven
hundred and fifty for five nights. So that is a
(26:49):
lot of financial gain that Steph is getting from that
sleep consultant.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Steph's a multimillionaire, Like that's nothing for her, Like she
could afford to do that herself. The person that's actually
gaining is the sleep consultant. That's the person who has
probably got a lot of value out of this podcast episode.
That's why I'm so confused by it, Like why wouldn't
Steph just disclose it is this Like she's just dropped
the ball.
Speaker 4 (27:10):
But doesn't that make it worse.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
If you're a multimillionaire who could just afford to pay
for this service, then why have you slipped it into
your podcast and potentially have been misleading to a vulnerable audience.
I mean, also, the fact is most of the people
listening wouldn't be able to afford this service.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
I just think it shows the lack of care from
influencers in regards to the A Triple c's rules, Like
I don't think that they even take it on board
some of them. I just think it's this that I
don't think that they think anything serious will happen.
Speaker 4 (27:40):
But that's not true.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
As we've seen in recent times, there are going to
be a lot of influencers who are copying huge fines
for careless errors like this.
Speaker 4 (27:48):
Well, that is where we're going to leave things today.
Speaker 6 (27:50):
But if you want to hear more from us, we
drop a subscriber only episode every Thursday for our Outspoken
Plus subscribers. If you want to sign up, it's just
five ninety nine a month. All the details to sign
up in our show notes. We also have a second
podcast called The mums Group, so if you want to
listen to that that drops on a Wednesday. Just search
the mums Group on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you
(28:12):
listen to podcasts.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
This podcast was recorded on the.
Speaker 6 (28:15):
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
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.