By Cydney Banton and Miranda J. Brady
Introduction
Since the popularization of social media and Web 2.0 in the early 2000s, mothers have shared their experiences through “mommyblogs” and “mommy groups” on various online platforms and message boards (Lopez, 2009; Doucet & Mauthner, 2012). In more recent years, a globalised network of users and content centred around motherhood has emerged on popular platforms such as Instagram, one that amplifies the voices of “momfluencers,” online influencers whose brand focuses largely – or exclusively – on their identity as mothers (Lopez, 2009; Petersen, 2023). Momfluencers not only provide parenting advice like their early millennium predecessors, they are also situated within a neoliberal market model, which fundamentally shapes the kind of content they create and user engagement that they encourage (Anderson & Moore, 2014). Within this context, the affiliate-marketing advertising model has provided influencers in online motherhood spaces with a model for earning a commission on selling large quantities of generally low-quality goods to an expansive consumer base of mothers. In doing so, these influencers exploit the insecurities associated with modern child-rearing by marketing an aspirational version of motherhood and conflating it with the material products being sold.
This research examines how constructs of motherhood function under a neoliberal framework and how they are perpetuated through digital representations and market-driven social media logic, or the technologies and “norms, strategies, mechanisms, and economies” underpinning the dynamics of social media (van Dijck & Poell, 2013; Schwartz, 2017). It argues that the convergence of social media logic, paired with the incentives of affiliate marketing,
encourage momfluencers and algorithms to promote an idealised expression of homogenised, aspirational, and aesthetic motherhood and restrictive constructions of family units and roles. This research employed open-coding and textual analysis of 274 pieces of content created by 20 Instagram affiliate marketing momfluencers over the span of 21 days in early 2024. It explored overly curated performances of motherhood, the likes of which drove away mommyblog audiences in previous decades. We argue that such depictions conceal the actual labour of care and indicate that mothers should be flexible within neoliberalism (Hearn, 2009) as they “financialize the domestic space” (Vandenbeld Giles, 2020, 272). Such momfluencers model the folding together of their paid and unpaid work without support, which often leads to work precarity and low remuneration for mothers (Vandenbelt Giles, 2020; Brady, 2024), with largely commission-based paid influencing labour. In the process, momfluencers encourage a perpetual cycle of consumption and disposal. While the global environmental and labour impacts (Henaway, 2023; Cowen, 2010) of momfluencers are beyond the scope of this article, they are inevitably disastrous. This research contributes to an early body of scholarship at the intersections of motherhood and media/platform studies (Lopez, 2009; Wilson & Yochim, 2015, 2017), and draws attention to the social harm created by momfluencing as a largely unregulated and potentially exploitative form of content production (Kuzminov, 2023; Vdovychenko, 2019).
Motherhood and Taste
Media have long been outlets for viewers and users to develop aesthetic and taste preferences, and to seek instruction on self-improvement (Spigel, 2009; Sender, 2006; Ouellette & Hay, 2008; Lunt, 2008; Brady, 2024; Anderson & Moore, 2014; Lazar, 2017). As aesthetic tastes are changeable and often established by upper classes, lower and middle classes attempt to obtain
them through media and product consumption and by investing their labour in developing an aspirational lifestyle (Bourdieu, 1984). In doing so, they also gain the cultural capital, or the knowledge of what products indicate a preferred taste and how to appropriately purchase and consume them (Bourdieu, 1984).
In online motherhood spaces, content creators attempt to promote idealised depictions of motherhood by visually demonstrating how inexpensive products can be used to address domestic inconveniences. These “hacks” demonstrate a form of cultural capital as these momfluencers illustrate how they can identify and utilize an inexpensive product in a creative and modern way to solve a supposed domestic problem. Moreover, momfluencers demonstrate class distinction (Bourdieu, 1984) as they film in what appear to be affluent or designer kitchens, homes, or properties. The goal of this content is to convey an aspirational experience of motherhood that consumers will want to attain through consumption. These approaches to content creation may be promoted through algorithms, emulation, and re-creation by other content creators.
Further, momfluencers demonstrate a sense of social capital where interpersonal relationships, or in this case, an interconnected network/social media celebrity status (Hunter, 2016) can act as a resource that can be leveraged to generate capital and tangible benefits (Bourdieu, 1984). As they boost their popularity through thousands or even millions of followers, mompreneurs indicate their social capital through the volume of those who like and subscribe to their social media content. In this case, momfluencers savvy with content creation and social media logic (Van Dijck & Poell, 2013) get more followers, which will potentially lead to greater economic gain and social capital as entrepreneurs seeking upward mobility.
Mompreneurs demonstrate their entrepreneurialism and cultural capital through a sense of market-driven, post-feminist empowerment which is largely devoid of social justice concerns (Gill, 2004 Banet-Wiser et al, 2020; Rivers, 2017; Brady, 2024). Mothers are still expected to bear the responsibility of the ever-expanding burdens of household management and childcare, while also sharing in the responsibility of generating household income (Wilson & Yochim, 2015; Anderson & Moore, 2014). Therefore, momfluencers and other “mompreneurs” seek paid labour that still allows them flexible hours, and in some cases, do not inhibit them from staying home with their children full or near-full time (Wilton, 2018). In order to do this, many perform a type of conventional motherhood that appeals widely across broad audiences (Brady, 2024).
Motherhood can be understood as an institution that is patriarchal (Rich, 1986) or normative (O’Reilly, 2023), marked by rituals, performances, and aesthetics; its performance on social media by momfluencers is a highly symbolic and easily recognized simulacra within a consumer society (Baudrillard, 1994, 1970). This is one of the intensive mother who can ‘do it all’ and who is responsible for all aspects of her family’s lives and happiness (Hayes, 1998). According to Wilson & Yochim, mothers who engage in what they describe as “mamapreneurial” flexible labour such as blogging, or multi-level marketing, are primarily driven by neoliberal policies and attempting to attain an aspirational experience of a “good, happy family” (2015, p, 675), which also valorises a sense of family autonomy. In other terms, mothers should be able to balance everything without support in the service of an atomized family unit. While users originally came to online motherhood communities from a space of vulnerability, seeking authentic and realistic depictions of motherhood, and to find community and support (Petersen, 2017), social media logics increasingly pressure mothers to produce images of motherhood with high aesthetic value and no real signs of the struggles of mothering unless they can be resolved with a tip, trick, or new purchase.
Algorithmic Culture, Instagram, and Affiliate Linking
Social media logic (Van Dijck & Poell, 2013) must be understood within the context of algorithmic culture. The algorithm is a mathematical function that serves to predict results or reach an intended goal. In the context of Instagram, the algorithm is set to promote content to viewers that are most likely to engage (Saraco 2023). This means that the algorithm will often push content that has been frequently engaged with by other similar users, resulting in posts becoming “viral” (well-known or widely shared) (Saraco 2023). Posts that can grab attention, create controversy or even simply get users commenting tend to perform well, based solely on this engagement rather than the content of the post (Saraco 2023).
Algorithms have been criticised as they tend to uphold patterns of discrimination through the intended use of finding and promoting similarity, or “homophily” (Chun, 2018). As Chun (2018) states, “Homophily […] assumes and creates segregation; it presumes consensus and similarity within local clusters, making segregation a default characteristic of network neighbourhoods” (Chun, 2018, 76). When a user engages with content (by commenting on, liking, or sharing a post) the algorithm, designed to prompt more engagement, will promote similar or adjacent content to the user to prompt the same engagement response. The algorithm is further complicated by how it categorises individual users based on data collected about behaviour online (O’Neil, 2016, p. 33). All of this results in what is known as a “filter bubble,” a process whereby each user’s data and previous activity on and off the site informs the algorithm to create a narrow concept of what content would be most likely to be engaged (Kaluža, 2022).
The end result is that the user mostly sees content with which they already agree or interact. This has the additional consequence of creating “echo chambers,” wherein users are increasingly exposed to content and other users promoting similar views, giving the often inaccurate impression that their views reflect the majority opinion (Kaluža, 2022).
On Instagram, visual content is created to drive engagement, and is then further promoted widely via the algorithm (Saraco 2023; Germic et al., 2021; O’Neil, 2016). Instagram includes a discovery page, called the “for you” page, where content is presented to users based on previous engagement, and this is largely where algorithmic prompts occur. Instagram influencers have access to user-specific metrics to gauge their content’s performance and how their audience is responding to the content they create (Saraco 2023). While external parties are unable to assess the data that might quantify the success of posts (beyond comment and like counts) due to closed data surrounding analytics and algorithms, influencers have several analytical tools available to them to assess engagement (Saraco 2023).
When an influencer’s post links to a product, it is likely that the user’s intended goal is to promote sales or direct traffic to affiliated merchants. In contrast to traditional direct-to consumer sales and retail models, affiliate-linking provides commissions and perks (such as free merchandise, and more recently, brand trips) to an influencer in exchange for the attention and engagement of their viewership. Boosts in sales or traffic to the brand is usually tracked through the use of an affiliate link, which frequently offers a discount (Shopify, 2023).
“Marketplaces” like Amazon have inserted themselves within the affiliate marketing equation, making themselves the middleman for affiliate programs, providing “influencers” with as few as 500 followers the ability to earn commission on products without actually having to foster a relationship with the brand and thus owing them little allegiance (“What Is Affiliate
Marketing?” 2023). They can then promote most products available on Amazon. Many “brands” on Amazon seem to not be well-known, only as intermediaries between the factory producing the goods and the Amazon page which sells them through the process of “dropshipping” (Keenan, 2024; Herrmann, 2020). The result is a marketplace saturated with generally low-quality goods, many of which seem identical but sold under various brands (Herrmann, 2020).
Figure 1. The model of affiliate-linking (simplified), including marketplaces.
In this context, influencers are seemingly no longer expected to provide novel content about their personal lives for the sake of their “community” as micro-celebrities, but rather, audiences accept and perpetuate the commodification of influencer content through positive feedback and engagement that provide direct economic incentives to the influencers (Arnesson, 2023; De Benedictis & Orgad, 2017; Shan et al., 2020). Because affiliate linking momfluencers are a relatively new phenomenon compared with other forms of mompreneurism, research is still emerging on how motherhood is constructed in this context.
Methodology
Content posted by 20 momfluencers between January 1-21, 2024 was collected. Themes and patterns were identified from the content through open-coding and textual analysis, informed by methods and guidance described by Charmaz (2006), Hansen & Machin (2018) and Merrigan et al. (2012). Before data collection began, it was confirmed that institutional ethics permission was not needed to conduct the research as all information gathered was posted publicly (personal communication with E. Hersey, on Nov 22, 2023).
To ensure the data and selection process was not skewed by any personal use of the Instagram app, new email and Instagram accounts with zero followers or engagement were created. Collection was only performed using these accounts. On December 31, 2023, influencers were selected through non-random sampling by searching under the hashtag #amazonmom for the first 20 individuals who fit certain criteria set out at the beginning of the collection period (Merrigan et al. 2012; Hansen & Machin, 2018). These criteria targeted a specific type of influencer who 1. Posts within the niche of momfluencing, as a mother; 2. Falls within the category of “micro-influencers” to “macro-influencers” as defined by Park et al (2021) as between 10,000-100,000 and 100,000-1,000,000 followers, respectively; and 3. Uses Amazon affiliate-linking to promote products.
This targeting ensured the influencers had been active for long enough to have a relatively consistent audience and had experience in navigating their role as online personalities. It would also ensure that the momfluencer was not popular enough to reach “celebrity influencer” status of over 1 million followers, as this would make them more likely to have external pressures such as exclusive partnerships with brands, and guidance of management teams (Park et al., 2021; De Benedictis & Orgad, 2017). This provided a pool of subjects who had achieved relative success in the sphere of affiliate marketing and who were likely to conform to their own established profitable models using Instagram’s social media logic. The influencers targeted either worked while influencing on the side, or had made the decision to influence full-time while raising children. Content from 20 specific influencers, rather than a randomised batch of posts, was chosen for analysis in order to identify any patterns for how established influencers promote products. The influencers chosen for the collection period had between 23,357 and 614,474 followers, spanning a range of experiences. The average amount of followers per influencer was 196,773.
Beginning January 1, 2024, and ending January 21, 2024, data was collected. Collection took place in January to avoid results being affected by the busy holiday season, which historically involves excessive consumption and marketing (Desilver, 2023). Collection was divided into two categories: “live collection” to be performed each day, and “retroactive input” which could be performed beyond the initial live collection. As the research was data-heavy, this allowed for the initial collection of all posts to be performed over the 21-day period, without concern for posts being deleted.
The live collection was performed primarily to ensure all data was collected as soon as possible, and included downloading the content, and adding primary information (such as the date of the post, the influencer who posted, the hashtags and caption, and the link to the content) to a collection sheet. The retroactive data included creating audio transcription of the videos, taking analytical notes on the content and engagement patterns, and indicating the types of products promoted and how they were marketed (Rogers, 2021). After 21 days and an N=274 total posts, the data collection period ended.
A profile of de-identified demographic characteristics of the individual influencers and their immediate family was created (including gender-presentation, marital status, race, age, geographic location, sexual orientation, employment status, educational background etc.). The data was based on disclosures of the influencers and was publicly available through their published Instagram content. The data was anonymised due to ethics concerns (Rogers, 2021).
Engagement levels were quantified by identifying the amount of likes and comments a post received after 24 hours. This proved to be useful as a small number of posts were deleted within the first day of posting, which seemed related to poor performance of the content. Furthermore, some influencers decided to hide liking and comment engagement from their audience for the first few days of posting. Additional analytical information (such as follower count fluctuations) produced through social media analytics website socialblade.com were also considered to understand how audiences were reached and responded to content.
Coding Process and Analysis
Open-coding is the process of identifying, compiling and structuring qualitative data into categories through assigning codes which denote themes and concepts (Charmaz, 2006). Through textual and open-coding analysis of posts made by momfluencers, insight into the types of products momfluencers sell, the ways in which they are marketed, and any themes, symbols or patterns used to sell more products were sought (Rogers, 2021; Charmaz, 2006; Hansen & Machin, 2018). This was useful for the content analysed as it included large amounts of text, from captions, hashtags, and audio transcriptions. Furthermore, the visual cues and content descriptions provided necessary context beyond what was being said or written in the post.
Using NVivo software to code language and themes allowed for the identification of patterns that disclosed how momfluencers harness and are informed by the incentives provided by social media logic and affiliate marketing. This methodology was preferred given the qualitative and textual nature of visual content (Rogers, 2021; Charmaz, 2006).
To perform this coding, a word count query was performed to get a sense of any patterns in content captions. A word clound illustrates the prevalence of some of these patterns.
Figure 2. A word cloud of the top 50 words used in the post captions.
Further queries were made to better understand how different terms were used in context. For example, a query was run for domestic task-related terms such as “restock,” “clean,” and “declutter” which offered the ability to isolate and look for patterns surrounding who is using the terms and in what context. This NVivo query feature was also used to observe how the influencers referred to themselves and the work they do, both independently and within their families. By performing queries to understand how terms such as “I am” and “I have” and “we are” and “we have” are used differently, patterns could be found in the language used and where authority or ownership were taken in relation to the home and domestic tasks. This provided insights into how labour is distributed within the family unit.
Findings and Analysis
Demographic Data of Influencers
When examining the momfluencers selected for this research, attention was paid to the information that they self-disclosed in their posts on Instagram.
All influencers had been married for 3-15 years, and many had been with their partners since high school or college. They all presented as cisgender women in heteronormative relationships, married to men. None disclosed ever having been divorced.
While 15 of the 20 influencers were white or white-presenting, all 20 of their husbands were white or white-presenting. While the husbands all worked outside of the home, none of the influencers disclosed being employed outside of their influencer work. This indicates an above average familial wealth, or at least the stability required to only have one parent working in conventional paid employment.
The couples had between 1-4 children, with an average of 2.45 per couple. There were no mentions of adopted or foster children. There were also no mentions of blended families. All momfluencers shared images or recordings of their children in their content, often with the children using the products they were promoting.
Five momfluencers identified as Christians, with 11 hinting at their faith through mentions of prayer, church and God during the collection period. Seven did not post on Sundays for the duration of the collection period. Interestingly, this may be related to the geographic distribution of the influencers, which is concentrated in or nearby what is known as the “bible belt,” a region of the United States where there is a high concentration of practising Christians (Lee et al., 2024); eleven of the 18 momfluencers who had disclosed their state or city of residence were located in this region.
Content Type Distribution
Of the 274 posts studied, 175 (64%) actively promoted a product for purchase, with only 21 posts including the disclosure of partnerships with brands or retailers. Over 1200 products were promoted through these 175 posts (an average of 6.8 products per post). Of those 154 posts that did not disclose partnerships:
● 12 promoted goods from direct-to-consumer brands (brands available through their own online stores)
● 16 promoted retailers that sell products exclusively in-store (eg. HomeGoods) or brands that are only available through in-store purchases at a variety of retailers (eg. Behr Paint)
● 126 promoted products available online through affiliate links from commission-earning marketplaces such as Amazon and LikeToKnow (a similar commission-based website which allows influencers to compile links to items for sale across multiple websites). ○ Of these, 102 linked to items sold on Amazon (either directly, or by linking to Amazon through LikeToKnow).
Of the 99 posts where no product was promoted, 84 posts were categorised as “relatable,” that is, they shared content about the lives of the influencer, including their daily experiences, memes about motherhood, and DIY projects. Of all posts portraying domestic labour (85), only 9 (10%) did not include product promotion, indicating that domestic labour is largely showcased as a means of promoting the consumption of products through affiliate links.
Figure 3: Breakdown of content and which brands/retailers are being promoted.
Domestic Labour
Of the 85 posts where domestic labour such as cleaning, organising, and cooking were performed inside the home, the husbands of the influencers were only visible twice. In both cases, the husbands were helping to take down outdoor Christmas decorations and carrying heavy objects. These performances are in keeping with traditional expectations of male domestic labour (Germic et al., 2021).
Children were visible in 14 of the posts showing domestic labour, though mostly in videos where the mother is grocery shopping, or performing childcare. Children support domestic work only twice in these 85 posts, both utilising “gadgets” which make cleaning “fun” (One of these posts received 31,239 likes within 24 hours, the most of all posts analysed).
There were 69 posts which involved the influencer performing domestic functions alone. Many such videos were categorised as “closing shift” videos, wherein the mothers clean the kitchen after dinner, pack lunches for their children and husband, put away toys, and tidy the living space ahead of the following day. One should consider the duality of the performance of this labour, which is intended for an audience that does not include the influencer’s own family, and how this reinforces an expectation of domestic labour being invisible to the family.
One mother gave birth during the data collection period and the posts leading up to the arrival of her third child were filled with depictions of the mother preparing the home. This included preparing, at 8.5 months pregnant, a freezer full of 2 months’ worth of food to ensure the influencer’s family would be fed while she was recovering, reinforcing patriarchal motherhood ideals. No other adults were involved in this meal preparation, indicating an expected self-reliance of this mother to continue to perform domestic duties even in a heavily pregnant state.
Using terms like “must-have” and “can’t live without”, these influencers promote an ideal pursuit of perfection: an easy, organised, and streamlined version of motherhood that seemingly exists only through the consumption of more and more products. Most of the momfluencers studied were in a near-constant state or cycle of change: “resetting”, redecorating, reorganising, and restocking their homes. This is done aesthetically, ensuring cohesion through the use of matching organiser baskets and containers for their closets, ensuites, fridges and pantries. The influencers often fill these spaces with duplicate and bulk purchases, usually utilising out-of-sight overstock bins for any items that cannot be displayed in a way that is visually appealing or “satisfying”. In some cases, products such as cereals, flour or even juice are transferred from their original branded containers into aesthetically cohesive glass and acrylic containers marked with homemade printed labels. These organising products are often marketed as “must-have” items, implying that without them, a mother can not hope to remain organised. This purchase is one that prompts further labour from the audience for the sake of aesthetics over function. Not only will the audience member purchase the item, but now they will be tasked with finding a place to store it, clean it, and replenish its contents regularly.
Many momfluencers have delegated certain spaces within their pantry and fridge as “snack drawers”, which they fill throughout the week with pre-prepared healthy snacks for their young children to access, even if they are unavailable to help them. The overstocking of hygiene products, food, medication and clothing can be viewed as a form of hypervigilance on the part of the momfluencers. When viewing pantries and medicine cabinets quite literally filled with everything one could possibly need (often requiring regular “clean-outs” of expired products), it brings to mind scenes of doomsday preparation (Kelly 2016). Given that these families seemingly all live within driving distance of major retailers, and regularly film shopping trips, stockpiling apparently takes place in preparation for a disaster, rather than purchasing something when the need arises.
While spaces such as the laundry room or pantry are largely private, there seems to be particular attention paid to ensuring that they are also guest ready. In these moments, the influencer’s family is conspicuously absent. This domain of the mother is one that seemingly must be picture-perfect at all times. By opening this space up to the audience, influencers promote an aesthetic and curated expectation of visual appeal and organization for even private areas of the home. Once again, this serves to demonstrate an ever-growing slate of “necessary” work for mothers.
Returning to the concept of the unending domestic cycle, the influencers then tidy, clean and declutter various areas of their homes, often displaying mass amounts of waste in the process. Fridges once filled with food are cleaned out in time for the next grocery haul. Closets filled with affordable Amazon finds are decluttered in preparation for the next season. This constant state of change benefits influencers by allowing for the repetition of these types of posts over time. This cycle also creates a never-ending influx of new labour for them to perform. The influencers are seemingly never content with their environment and seem to frequently feel the need to “refresh” their home with new decor, new paint, or a new project. There is always something to be made better, more efficient, or more beautiful.
It is important to note that while images are highly manicured, the influencers do not purport to be perfect or infallible. In fact, their content relies on a controlled performance of imperfection in order to sell new items in pursuit of an unattainable ideal. However, the fallibility of the influencers is sanitised and frequently embedded squarely in the past. They “used to struggle with” an issue, but they have now found a solution, which they are willing to share with the viewer. They focus on their own shortcomings only after having found a solution to share, placing themselves on a pillar of personal growth and wisdom for their audiences to look up towards. The audience, in turn, is left to solve this supposed “problem” that up until this moment, they had failed to even notice. The “problem”, of course, is only showcased in order to promote more goods for the audience to consume. As with long-established advertising strategies (Marchand, 1985), the audience’s “failure” to identify and resolve apparent problems for their family is implied and reinforced by a sense of shame that they are not meeting societal expectations, which are established or amplified by the influencer.
To preserve the social capital that makes them successful, influencers are incentivized to actively promote unrealistic representations of motherhood. In the process, momfluencers also imply that the products the audience currently owns are not good enough, beautiful or aesthetically pleasing enough, or even dual-faceted enough. In either case, the influencers continue to promote solutions that can only be attained through consumption.
There seems to be an acknowledgement in the posts studied that motherhood is a difficult undertaking. Nonetheless, it is described through happy smiles and jokes, with the undercurrent message that if you face issues in your role as a mother, you have a duty to persevere and overcome by finding a novel solution for your family. This performance of resilience is typical of online motherhood spaces, as explored by Van Cleaf (2015), “Resilience narratives reverberate throughout the mommy blog genre and, in the process, depoliticize structural inequalities, even as they produce “likes” and “shares” and drive website traffic […]”. Rather than acknowledging these inequalities and difficulties, the sales-driven solution, it seems, is always to buy the next item that may make the task you are struggling with easier, more efficient, or at least more aesthetically pleasing.
Lifestyle
Influencers with smaller audiences tended to create more “relatable” and “realistic” motherhood content, while the most popular influencers in the sample did not seem to aim for relatability, opting instead for aesthetic and marketable depictions of motherhood and lifestyle in their content. This is regardless of how long the influencer had been active in content creation or blogging. Some influencers with smaller audiences had been posting publicly for far longer than those who had outperformed them and achieved the most success. This indicates that popularity is necessarily gained through consistent or long-term posting, but instead is related to the type of content being posted.
Moreover, the content examined promoted an above-average wealth and lifestyle. The influencers’ large and grandiose homes in the suburbs were seemingly always cleaned to perfection, with their “clean with me” videos usually having more to do with putting away clutter and organising than actually cleaning. At least four influencers had built custom homes in recent years, reflecting an above-average wealth. The relatively inexpensive products the influencers promoted were frequently showcased with background visuals of designer purses, cosmetics, and clothing. This marketing by association is common practice, but is a departure from relatability for those audience members looking for affordable purchases out of necessity. Similarly, some influencers promote “dupe” products of popular brands such as Ugg and Free The People, often promoting the affiliate-linked copies as being just as good, if not better, than the originals.
Heteronormative beauty standards were found to be the norm for all influencers, with all but one having long hair, and the one outlier having collarbone-length hair. The mothers tended to have a slim-to-average body shape, with no visible body hair, tattoos, or piercings (beyond in the earlobes). All wore some form of makeup, with those with the most followers tending to have more glamourous makeup, and many had extensive beauty and selfcare routines, including spray tans, facials, and nail appointments. Those with the most followers tended to have their hair styled in all posts, and many had bleached or dyed hair. In contrast, the less popular influencers tended to have more natural hair and looks.
All influencers tended to wear and promote feminine clothing, with some focusing on “coverage,” though it is unclear whether this was related to modesty or discomfort surrounding their (in some cases, recently post-partum) bodies. While all influencers could be described as conventionally attractive, those with the most followers tended towards less-natural portrayals of beauty.
The families of the influencers, when visible, also followed heteronormative beauty standards. Most female-presenting daughters (and particularly those of the most popular influencers) wore makeup and had their hair styled. This seems to be a standard for the younger family members as well, with mothers walking the viewer through morning routines where they help their daughters (in particular) achieve feminine beauty standards.
Notably, photoshoots occurred throughout the data collection period, with many families organising several photoshoots each year, celebrating various holidays and occasions. The preparation for these photoshoots, including outfit selection for the entire family, dressing and styling the children, and in some cases, creating the props and background visuals, were exclusively performed by mothers.
Overall, most of the momfluencers and their families could be characterized as an American traditional “nuclear” ideal. The representation of family that these influencers performed aligned with traditional, and in some cases conservative, expectations.
Waste and Consumption
Many of the over 1200 products promoted (or linked to) during the collection period were marketed not just for their aesthetics, but also for what can be described as their “extra functionalities”. These extra functionalities seem to act as rationale for replacing older, currently-owned versions of the same product. In the supposed logic of the influencers, one’s travel-sized body wash container should also include a silicone body scrubber, and one’s trash bin should also include a sweep-up vacuum functionality. While these curated options offering dual pragmatic functions can be beneficial to those purchasing a given type of product for the first time, they also serve to promote waste through the discarding of completely functional goods in the search for something “new and improved”.
One influencer purchased a brand new $90,000 SUV as a “present to herself” during the collection period, with the argument that she had wanted a new car for a “really long time” and asserts that that her “main complaint” was that her previous, 4-year-old SUV was “too small” and lacked “ceiling vents in the back seat”. This pattern of minor issues being resolved by simply replacing the product that is already owned recurred throughout the collection period at every price point.
Much of the content studied concerned the then-upcoming Valentine’s Day. January 4th marked the day when Valentine’s content began, totalling 29 posts. By the end of the collection period, 24 days still remained until the holiday, indicating that the influencers were ordering products, filming and promoting purchases well in advance of the actual date. In total, seven out of 20 influencers posted Valentine’s content, usually concerning home decor, classroom and teacher gifts, as well as “galentines” celebration hosting ideas (such as food and cocktail recipes).
This act of gifting is predominantly marketed through aesthetics, as well as excess. The influencer mothers utilise their DIY skills and Amazon bulk purchases to ensure their children’s classmates receive unique themed gifts (ex. homemade Taylor Swift cards and personalised sunglasses) as well as several treats. Teachers were also included in this gift-giving process, usually receiving gift cards. This once again indicates an above-average wealth. Not only do the families have disposable income, but also the time necessary to plan and execute these elaborate projects. Once again, this labour was performed without any help from the children, husband or other family members.
Engagement
Each Instagram post made by the momfluencers was typically accompanied by a caption. A recurring feature of these captions was encouragement from the influencer for audience members to insert a word in the comments section in order to receive links directly via Instagram’s direct messaging function (“DM’s”). Usually the word in question was related to the post in some way, such as the word “heart” in relation to a post about Valentine’s decor. In providing this encouragement, the influencer prompts users to engage with their content, which the influencer then further engages with by responding to and liking the comments.
For influencers with high levels of engagement, programs can be used to automate responses to audience comments and to send links to them via DMs. Large volumes of high frequency engagement will theoretically result in influencers’ posts being promoted through the algorithm, allowing them to reach new audiences. While research on this phenomena is still preliminary, evidence indicates that influencers with larger audiences experience a higher follower growth, regardless of how often they post.
While comments left by the influencers’ audiences fell outside the scope of this research, it is worth stating that not all feedback was positive. From unsolicited parenting advice to overt antagonism, the influencers receive a wide array of negative commentary, most of which goes unanswered or is even deleted.
In one particularly jarring post, an influencer purchased a new baby seat for her colicky baby, hoping the new seat would make the baby more amenable to car rides, which he had been resistant towards for several weeks. She stated that she was “sick of it” and explained that “if this will help, it is worth it”. She bid goodbye to her perfectly usable previous car seat, insisting she “absolutely loved [it] because of its convenience,” essentially continuing to market this product that had seemingly not met her own family’s needs. Almost immediately after the new seat was posted, the influencer began to receive feedback informing her that the seat in question was under federal investigation for safety issues relating to the deaths of several infants. One commenter advised her to “[…] Give it back even if it was gifted lol”. The brand behind the seat had itself posted a positive comment about the creator’s video, but later deleted the post, possibly due to the influencer’s audience responding directly to their comment with concerns about safety. In spite of this, the influencer’s post still received hundreds of comments requesting a link to the product, along with over 4,000 likes within 24 hours of posting.
This level of engagement demonstrates how influential these posts can be in promoting a product. The influencer never responded to any comments relating to the federal investigation and did not delete the post despite the backlash. In this scenario, the influencer is placed in the precarious position of choosing between their audience and a brand they may be partnering with (or hoping to do so in the future). This is even more concerning when one takes into account that information about many of the brands selling products on Amazon are often scarce. In some cases, these brands are nothing more than drop-shipping operations, with varying levels of regulatory oversight, quality assurance, or safety controls (Keenan, 2024; Herrmann, 2020).
Conclusion
This research examined how social media influencing has created new, aspirational avenues for mothers to “have it all,” that is, to simultaneously perform paid labour and the tasks traditionally relegated to mothers at home. This follows the market-driven ideals of post-feminism (Gill, 2004; Slaughter, 2012; Banet-Weiser et al, 2020). In essence, it is the patriarchal and neoliberal weaponization of feminist work movements through the push for women to perform the work they fought to attain access to, without reducing the expectations of household labour. Moreover, the momfluencers observed were expected to do this work flawlessly. While audiences originally came to online motherhood communities from a space of vulnerability, seeking authentic and realistic depictions of motherhood, and to find community (Petersen, 2017), social media logics increasingly pressure mothers to produce images of motherhood with high aesthetic value to sell products with no real signs of the struggles of mothering.
Under the incentives of affiliate marketing and social media logic, diverse and authentic lived experiences of motherhood are displaced in favour of highly curated and deliberate engagement-seeking behaviours to drive consumption (Kuzminov, 2023; Petersen 2023). In the end, under the pressures explored in this research, profit dictates the collective perception of “good” motherhood and the values it perpetuates. The data gathered suggests that influencers who effectively engage consumer insecurities by promoting traditional and normative (O’Reilly, 2023) expectations of motherhood and femininity are more likely to succeed in capitalising and growing social capital through Instagram. The homogeneity of normative motherhood in the sample suggested that not everyone can succeed in this terrain and build a wide following, or social capital, regardless of the duration of their efforts. Thus, as Chun (2018) points out, homophily is perpetuated through more of the same.
Examples of affiliate linking momfluencing explored encouraged particularly conservative, aesthetic, and aspirational performances of motherhood as a selling point – an experience to be attained through the proper purchase, consumption, and disposal of curated products as a form of cultural capital. In this context, motherwork (Hill-Collins, 2007) was modelled as domestic labour primarily performed alone and integrated with hyper-consumption; this demonstrated what Baudrillard described as “the collective ritual of consumption” rather than the satisfaction of actual needs (1970, p. 105). The cycle of domestic labour and product consumption was never-ending as user engagement is always fuelled by exposure to new and aesthetically appealing content; it is a perpetual turn-over of products through the work of mothers in resetting, redecorating, reorganizing, restocking, and refreshing to produce a picture perfect version of the home, which in turn helps to maintain the autonomy of the family unit (Wilson & Yochim, 2015; 2017). Through this labour, momfluencers demonstrate and proport to solve the apparent problems of their family mostly alone.
While it may be enticing to vilify momfluencers for preying upon consumer insecurities, it is important to remember that they themselves are being exploited for their labour. Often, they earn cents on the dollar in commission for marketing products. As more and more influencers enter this affiliate marketplace space, the pool of labour grows, and with it, the ability to earn commission grows smaller. Much like Multi-Level Marketing schemes, affiliate marketing programs prey on very reasonable desires to have access to paid labour while raising children. However, this neoliberal model depends on the mother to be flexible and insecure in her labour.
As there is a lack of algorithmic transparency in the use of data collected by corporations, researchers are limited in their ability to understand and quantify what is happening in this grey area of the internet. Legislators are siloed away from content and social media phenomena through their own algorithms. In identifying gaps in social media research, concerns can be brought to the attention of activists and governments to demand transparency and change.
Limitations and Areas for Future Research
As with all research involving social media, limitations exist due to closed data surrounding algorithms and user interactions and engagement (Saraco 2023; Rogers, 2021). The mystique surrounding social media algorithms can be pointed to as a reason for the limits of research through this lens. Further to this, as new media and platform capabilities are introduced, media logic can shift how users interact with content, other users and creators (Saraco, 2023). As research into social media topics is published, shifts in trends can make novel social media research outdated in a matter of months (Rogers, 2021). This is, of course, all the more reason to study specific trends and forms of engagement, if only to take a snapshot of the social media landscape of the time (Rogers, 2021).
The dates chosen for the collection period of this research were limited based on the scope of the project. As high levels of consumption-related posts were anticipated during the holiday season, January was selected. It is important to note that this may have affected content and engagement. As this data was collected from social media, it is important to acknowledge that the posting behaviour and content production is likely to be influenced by various factors (Rogers, 2021). Furthermore, social media followings may not be fully indicative of active audiences. Influencers can purchase followers to inflate their audience and be perceived as more popular (Rogers, 2021).
The influencers were followed for a limited time, meaning while some posted frequently and consistently across the duration of the collection period, others did not post frequently enough to provide a fulsome analysis of their content. Some influencers underwent experiences (including going on vacation, taking time away from posting, or in one case, giving birth to their third child) that shifted their content production for the duration of the collection period.
The influencers were chosen, in part, based on their different follower counts. While intentionally done as a means of gaining an understanding of how behaviour may change as influencers gain popularity, it had the unintended effect of limiting the ability to analyse content shared with audiences of the same size and engagement levels. In future research, more specific analysis on influencers with similarly-sized audiences should be performed to attain more fulsome results. Similarly, as this data is qualitative in nature; the patterns and themes being researched are interpretive and should be regarded as such.
Finally, the interactions between various momfluencers were not included in this research, but preliminary findings indicate that there is a vast network of momfluencers engaging with one another’s content, often applauding one another for their “amazing finds” or for being “such a great mom”. This fell outside of the scope of the project, but points to an untapped research area for understanding how this engagement itself can perpetuate this practice of capitalising on one’s role as a mother and the overall understanding of what makes a “great mom”.
Works Cited
Anderson G. and Moore J.G. (2014). “Doing it all…and making it look easy!”; Yummy Mummies, Mompreneurs and the North American Neoliberal Crisis of the Home. Mothering in the Age of Neoliberalism. Bradford: Demeter Press.
Arnesson, J. (2023). Influencers as ideological intermediaries: promotional politics and authenticity labour in influencer collaborations. Media, Culture & Society, 45(3), 528-544. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221117505
Banet-Weiser, S., Gill, R., & Rottenberg, C. (2020). Postfeminism, popular feminism and neoliberal feminism? Sarah Banet-Weiser, Rosalind Gill and Catherine Rottenberg in conversation. Feminist Theory, 21(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700119842555
Baudrillard, J. (1993). Symbolic exchange and death. Sage Publications.
Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation (S. Glaser, Trans.). University of Michigan Press.
Baudrillard, Jean. (1970). The Consumer Society : Myths and Structures. Sage.
Brady, Miranda J. (Forthcoming, 2024). Mother Trouble: Mediations of White Maternal Angst After Second Wave Feminism. Toronto University of Toronto Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard: Routledge and Kagan Paul Ltd.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Coding in grounded theory practice. (pp. 42-60). In Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Chun, Wendy Hui Kyong. ‘Queering Homophily’. In Pattern Discrimination. Meson Press 2018., 2018.
Cowen, Deborah (2010) “A Geography of Logistics: Market Authority and the Security of Supply Chains.” The Annals for the Association of American Geographers. 100(3): 1-21. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00045601003794908
De Benedictis, S., Orgad, S. (2017). The Escalating Price of Motherhood: Aesthetic Labour in Popular Representations of ‘Stay-at-Home’ Mothers. In: Elias, A., Gill, R., Scharff, C. (eds) Aesthetic Labour. Dynamics of Virtual Work. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47765-1_5
Desilver, Drew. “Online Shopping Has Grown Rapidly in the U.S., but Most Sales Are Still in Stores.” Pew Research Center, 22 Nov. 2023, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/11/22/online-shopping-has-grown-rapidly-in-u-s-but-most-sales-are-still-in stores/.
Doucet, A. and Mauthner, N.S. (2012) “Tea and Tupperware: Mommy Blogging as Care, Work and Consumption” in Georgia Phillips and Susie Weller (Eds) Critical Approaches to Care: Understanding Caring Relations, Identities and Cultures. London: Routledge; pp. 92-104.
Germic, E. R., Eckert, S., & Vultee, F. (2021). The Impact of Instagram Mommy Blogger Content on the Perceived Self-Efficacy of Mothers. Social Media + Society, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211041649
Gill, Rosalind. ‘Postfeminist Media Culture: Elements of a Sensibility’. European Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, May 2007, pp. 147–66. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549407075898.
Hays, Sharon. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
Hearn, Alison. 2009. “Insecure: Narratives and Economies of the Branded Self in Transformation Television.” In TV Transformations: Revealing the Makeover Show, ed. Tanya Lewis, 55–64. New York: Routledge.
Henaway, Mostafa. ‘Amazon’s Distribution Space: Constructing a “Labour Fix” through Digital Taylorism and Corporate Keynesianism’. ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography 67, no. 4 (29 November 2023): 202–16. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfw-2022- 0017.
Hill Collins, P. (2007). Shifting the Center: Race, Class, and Feminist Theorizing About Motherhood. In A. O’Reilly (Ed.), Maternal Theory: Essential Readings (pp. 311–330). Demeter Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1rrd94h.23
Hunter, A. (2016). Monetizing the mommy: mommy blogs and the audience commodity. Information, Communication & Society, 19(9), 1306–1320. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1187642
Kaluža, J. (2022). Habitual Generation of Filter Bubbles: Why is Algorithmic Personalisation Problematic for the Democratic Public Sphere? Javnost – The Public, 29(3), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2021.2003052
Keenan, Michael. ‘What Is Amazon Dropshipping? How To Dropship on Amazon in 2024 – Shopify Canada’. Shopify, https://www.shopify.com/ca/blog/amazon-dropshipping. Accessed 4 Apr. 2024.
Kelly, Casey Ryan. ‘The Man-Pocalpyse: Doomsday Preppers and the Rituals of Apocalyptic Manhood’. Text and Performance Quarterly 36, no. 2–3 (2 July 2016): 95– 114. https://doi.org/10.1080/10462937.2016.1158415.
Kuzminov, M. (2023). Council post: Social responsibility and ethics in influencer marketing. Forbes. Retrieved 22 November 2023, from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2023/01/30/social-responsibility-and ethics-in-influencer-marketing/
Lazar, M.M. (2017). ‘Seriously Girly Fun!’: Recontextualising Aesthetic Labour as Fun and Play in Cosmetics Advertising. In: Elias, A., Gill, R., Scharff, C. (eds) Aesthetic Labour. Dynamics of Virtual Work. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47765-1_2
Lee, Mark Abadi, Shayanne Gal, Lloyd. ‘MAP: From the Bible Belt to the Rust Belt, the United States Has 13 Distinct “Belts”’. Business Insider. Accessed 4 April 2024. https://www.businessinsider.com/regions-america-bible-belt-rust-belt-2018-4.
Lopez, L. K. (2009). The radical act of “mommy blogging”: redefining motherhood through the blogosphere. New Media & Society, 11(5), 729-747. https://doi org.proxy.library.carleton.ca/10.1177/1461444809105349
Lunt, Peter. 2008. “Little Angels: The Mediation of Parenting.” Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies 22: 537–46. Full PDF.
Marchand, Roland. (1985). Advertising the American Dream: Making way for Modernity, 1920-1940. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Merrigan et al. (2012). ‘Strategies for Data Collection.’ (pp. 63-67). In Communication Research Methods: Canadian edition. 2nd ed. Oxford.
Merrigan, G., Huston, C. L., & Johnston, R. (2012). What counts as data? In Communication Research Methods: Canadian Edition. (pp. 60-67). Oxford University Press.
O’Neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction. Penguin Books.
O’Reilly, A. (ed.) (2023). Normative Motherhood: Regulations, Representations, and Reclamations. Bradford Demeter Press.
Ouellette, Laurie, and James Hay. 2008. Better Living through Reality TV: Television and Post-Welfare Citizenship. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Park, J., Lee, J. M., Xiong, V. Y., Septianto, F., & Seo, Y. (2021). David and Goliath: When and Why Micro-Influencers Are More Persuasive Than Mega-Influencers. Journal of Advertising, 50(5), 584–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2021.1980470
Petersen, Anne Helen. Too Fat, Too Slutty, Too Loud: The Rise and Reign of the Unruly Woman. New York: Plume, 2017.
Petersen, Sara. Momfluenced: Inside the Maddening, Picture-Perfect World of Mommy Influencer Culture. Beacon Press, 2023.
Rich, A. (1976). Of woman born : motherhood as experience and institution (1st ed.). Norton.
Rivers, Nichola. 2017. Postfeminism(s) and the Arrival of the Fourth Wave: Turning Tides. Camden: Palgrave.
Rogers, R. (2021). Visual media analysis for Instagram and other online platforms. Big Data & Society, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211022370
Saraco, Fran. “How the Instagram Algorithm Works (Up-to-Date for 2024).” Shopify, 14 June 2023, https://www.shopify.com/ca/blog/instagram-algorithm.
Schwarz, J. A. (2017), Platform Logic: An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Platform Based Economy. Policy & Internet, 9: 374-394. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.159
Sender, Katherine. 2006. “Queens for a Day: Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and the Neoliberal Project.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 23, no. 2: 131–51.
Shan, Y., Chen, K.-J., & Lin, J.-S. (Elaine). (2020). When social media influencers endorse brands: the effects of self-influencer congruence, parasocial identification, and perceived endorser motive. International Journal of Advertising, 39(5), 590–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2019.1678322
Spigel, Lynn. 2009. TV by Design: Modern Art and the Rise of Network Television. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Van Cleaf, K. (2015). Of Woman Born to Mommy Blogged: The Journey from the Personal as Political to the Personal as Commodity. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 43(3), 247-264. https://doi.org/10.1353/wsq.2015.0064
Van Dijck, José, and Thomas Poell. “Understanding Social Media Logic.” Media and Communication, vol. 1, no. 1, Aug. 2013, pp. 2–14. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v1i1.70.
Vandenbeld Giles, Melinda. 2020. “From Home to House: Neoliberalism, Mothering, and the De-domestication of the Private Sphere?” In The Routledge Companion to Motherhood, ed. Lynn O’Brien Hallstein, Andrea O’Reilly, and Melinda Vandenbeld Giles. London: Routledge.
Vdovychenko, Nataliia. “Influencer Marketing Has Some Serious Ethical Issues.” Diggit Magazine, 29 Jan. 2019, https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/influencer-marketing has-some-serious-ethical-issues.
“What Is Affiliate Marketing? Everything You Need to Know in 2024.” Shopify, 7 Sept. 2023, https://www.shopify.com/ca/blog/affiliate-marketing.
Wilson & Yochim. (2017). Mothering through Precarity: Women’s Work and Digital Media. Durham: Duke University Press.
Wilson, J. A., & Yochim, E. C. (2015). Mothering Through Precarity: Becoming mamapreneurial. Cultural Studies, 29(5–6), 669–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502386.2015.1017139
Wilton, Shauna. 2018. Mompreneurs, Opting-Out, and Leaning In: Work/Family Choices under Neoliberalism. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture and Social Justice. 39 (1): 191-204.
Annex I
| Influencer ID | Followers Jan 1 | Followers Jan 21 | Difference Δ | Difference Δ % | Total Posts | Followers Lost/Gained per post (average) | Ranking Jan 1 | Ranking Jan 21 |
| A | 23,357 | 23,329 | -28 | -0.12% | 14 | -2.0 | 20 | 20 |
| B | 30,321 | 30,351 | 30 | 0.10% | 4 | 7.5 | 19 | 19 |
| C | 43,175 | 43,094 | -81 | -0.19% | 18 | -4.5 | 18 | ↗17 |
| D | 43,992 | 42,192 | -1,800 | -4.27% | 6 | -300.0 | 17 | ↘18 |
| E | 45,180 | 46,107 | 927 | 2.01% | 12 | 77.3 | 16 | 16 |
| F | 65,530 | 65,974 | 444 | 0.67% | 4 | 111.0 | 15 | 15 |
| G | 103,565 | 103,266 | -299 | -0.29% | 10 | -29.9 | 14 | 14 |
| H | 124,421 | 129,489 | 5,068 | 3.91% | 19 | 266.7 | 13 | 13 |
| I | 145,369 | 143,654 | -1,715 | -1.19% | 20 | -85.8 | 12 | 12 |
| J | 149,784 | 159,367 | 9,583 | 6.01% | 11 | 871.2 | 11 | 11 |
| K | 201,610 | 201,334 | -276 | -0.14% | 9 | -30.7 | 10 | 10 |
| L | 214,889 | 230,564 | 15,675 | 6.80% | 25 | 627.0 | 9 | 9 |
| M | 219,110 | 239,814 | 20,704 | 8.63% | 16 | 1294.0 | 8 | ↗7 |
| N | 224,716 | 233,626 | 8,910 | 3.81% | 8 | 1113.8 | 7 | ↘8 |
| O | 246,331 | 298,807 | 52,476 | 17.56% | 23 | 2281.6 | 6 | ↗5 |
| P | 269,672 | 281,945 | 12,273 | 4.35% | 17 | 721.9 | 5 | ↘6 |
| Q | 287,804 | 302,803 | 14,999 | 4.95% | 18 | 833.3 | 4 | 4 |
| R | 390,814 | 483,848 | 93,034 | 19.23% | 23 | 4045.0 | 3 | 3 |
| S | 491,353 | 506,891 | 15,538 | 3.07% | 13 | 1195.2 | 2 | 2 |
| T | 614,474 | 631,946 | 17,472 | 2.76% | 4 | 4368.0 | 1 | 1 |
| TOTALS 3,935,467 | 4,198,401 | 262,934 | 6.68% | 274 | 959.6 | – | – |
36
Annex II
| Audio Transcription 1 Today I’m washing all of my Valentine’s Day dishes to get them ready for my shelves, but is anyone else sick of this wet, stinky drying mat next to their sink? I came across this stone drying mat, (well, actually my husband did), and it has been a game-changer. When you set your dishes on it, it dries within 60 seconds. No more wet, soggy mat that you have to constantly wash to keep the smell away. It’s super absorbent,so you can just wash your dishes and then set them on top. | = Ownership: Individualised ownership of this space (pantry)/task = Domestic tasks = Product being promoted (2) = Relatability: to audience = Problem: Negative description. Current product was actually creating more work (constantly needing washing) = Influencer endorsement: Influencer describes products with positive adjectives. “game-changer” = Problem solved = Selling point: Expediency/efficiency |
| Audio Transcription 2 We have to restock backpacks, do dishes, pack lunches, finish putting away the groceries. And it’s almost 9 p.m. We are running so far behind tonight. I hate to admit how many times I’ve had this for my dinner. Love me some discounted flowers. Flowers like this. | = Ownership: Shared ownership of task: “We” used (but only the influencer is visible or performing tasks) = Cycle of change: “Restock” = Domestic tasks = Fallibility: “this” is the leftover crusts of her children’s sandwiches. Common occurrence. At 9pm, she has not eaten dinner. Depiction of sacrifice? = Self-sufficiency: She loves flowers, purchases them for herself (at discount) and in the video |
| This is just gonna have to wait till tomorrow. | spends time arranging them herself. She takes care of her family, and must take care of herself and her needs/wants as well. = Fallibility: Imperfection. “the job never ends”. She is the sole bearer of this burden. |
| Audio Transcription 3 2023 Amazon Travel Best Sellers. First up are these fluted suitcases. I have them in two sizes and absolutely love them. This pie safe that’s customizable and allows you to take desserts on the go super easily. My kids scooter suitcases were a definite best seller.The best part is the suitcase part detaches so they have a scooter when you get to your destination. Travel toiletry bottles with built-in hair scrubbers and loofahs and This cup holder for planes that easily holds your cup on your tray table or your phone. This is a definite must-have. This silicone toothbrush holder that goes right on your mirror to keep your toothbrushes off the counter and This carry-on suitcase that has a built-in cup holder, a spot to hold your phone as well as built-in chargers, is perfectly organised inside and has hooks on the | = External endorsement: Purported approval of other audience members. “You guys” = creating community. Influencer implies that because many audience members purchased products that they are endorsing them, when it is impossible to assert this without seeking feedback. = Products being promoted (16) = Influencer endorsement = Selling point: Extra functionalities = Selling point: Expediency/efficiency |
| outside for extra bags. This travel toddler bed that has a built-in air pump, removable sheet and it folds back up so small you can put it in your carry-on suitcase. A travel medicine container that holds so much more and these simple straps for attaching several suitcases together. This two-in-one glasses contacts case has been one of my favorites for two years running and You guys love this over the headrest cup holder snack dish combo. A folding compact three-in-one charger to charge your phone, watch and headphones on the go and These tiny toiletry pucks were a huge seller. This is a great way to fill up those tiny items on the go. These small nightlights that fit right into a USB port, these also work in your car which is great and Last was this travel potty. Enjoy! |
- JourMS - 