Hello!
I got a great question in my Dear Baby bank last month that felt better suited to a solo podcast than my written column, so I’ve decided to dedicate an entire episode to it. It concerns influencing, sponcon, advertising, selling out, and what constitutes a morally impactful choice in any of those realms. This episode is sort of a sequel to my answer to last month’s question about navigating immoral desires.
Thanks for listening!Haley
P.s. Here’s the question in full if you’d like to read it yourself versus hear me read it at the beginning of the episode:
Hi Haley! I'm trying to work through some of my own thoughts on fame/influencer culture and sponcon and have been thinking a lot about the costs associated with doing good when many societal structures seem to incentivize greed, ambition in all its forms...aka doing bad. This prompted me to reread your “When I was an influencer” newsletter and while I admire your dedication to your ideals, and often turn to you for clarity and understanding, my unsolicited POV is: I do wonder if you're being too hard on yourself?
I also wonder how you manage to uphold such strict values of no brand deals without becoming bitter or resentful that so many other people are profiting off doing a lot worse. As well, writing and many artistic pursuits are notoriously precarious and fraught with financial distress. Even so, writers and people who are similarly public about their desire to "do good" are often held to standards of purity politics which to me feel unfair when we don't hold people in other professions (investment bankers, tech engineers, etc.) to the same standards.
To be clear, I don't think doing sponcon (depending what it is) is even bad, necessarily, (perhaps neutral?) so I wonder why you think it is antithetical to what you are trying to do with your writing. I feel like writers deserve some kind of opportunity to make money, too...they are more deserving than so many people who are exploiting systems IMO. Judging by the products you do share (which are by no means "needs" but lovely recommendations, many of which I've purchased and enjoyed), I wonder why you think opting out of sponcon entirely is the best form of activism?
Women (and people in general) are always buying products (some that we need, some that we genuinely want that make our lives better, and some that we don't want but are indoctrinated into wanting and lead us to a cycle of needless purchasing to mask our feelings of inferiority.) That is to say, I don't think all consumption is the same and perhaps if you advertised product that you believed in, it could have greater impact than promoting nothing? Isn't there a road where you could actually amplify and share brands you love that are making quality products or which are sustainably made? Like, is sharing an Amazon link of a cervical neck stretching device bad in and of itself because it's from Amazon and Jeff Bezos does not need more money, or is it only bad if you're profiting off that recommendation?
Presumably, not all your purchasing decisions align with your ideals either, so then is the issue not your individual purchase but propagating it to a larger audience? I'm sure you use skincare products but where is the line between advertising something you actually like for money versus making women feel deficient about their natural skin? (I'm thinking of Jessica DeFino's wonderful writing.) Also, if a brand came to you and wanted to invest in Maybe Baby in a way that would give you more freedom, money, time off, etc. and if you actually liked the product, would that be a bad deal? Isn't it a good thing for a brand to use some of their money to invest in the development of art or thinking...which is what you do?
All of this being said, I do think maybe I am missing something and I'd like to better understand what led you to maintaining a hard NO on sponcon now that you're in a position of financial stability. Do you ever waiver? Do you ever feel like you incur costs as a result of your moral code? Is it frustrating to do good and incur the financial losses when most people around you aren't holding themselves to the same standard?
I struggle with this but I also don't want to conveniently self-mythologize to make it easier to sleep at night, ya know?! Isn't it an oversimplification to say “selling out is always a prerequisite to fame”? To some people, you're famous (I know you don't think so but you still have a considerable IG following and are recognizable to many) and you certainly haven't sold out. Of course, you perpetuated certain structures to get to this position and then stopped when you felt secure which I think is so admirable. But even still, what is selling out? Is it one brand deal? Is it multiple? What is fame? Is it reaching Oprah status or is it just trying to break six figures as an influencer?
Help me make sense of this please. I hope none of the above came across as a criticism. I just truly adore everything you write and I felt like having you engage with my nonsensical brain might help me better understand my own views.
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit haleynahman.substack.com/subscribe
