Click here to visit the Beauty Brains blog.
Welcome to the new Forum. Please feel free to start a new discussion.
Interesting article in the NY Times
-
The NYT has an article on beauty blogs: www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/fashion/31SKIN.html,
I found a link to it while I was poking around on jezebel.com/351146/beauty-bloggers-are-the-lowest-form-of-freeloader. The article is worth reading, as are the comments on Jezebel*. I read some of the blogs that are mentioned (should I say "targeted?") and have to agree that, in general, bloggers are much less critical then they used to be, which makes me suspicious. I've also noticed that the same products will pop up on a bunch of different blogs, which also makes me suspicious.
I've always assumed that these guys were getting products for free but I had no idea just how much. I've never taken their "reviews" too seriously; I read them mostly when I get bored at work and to keep up with what's new. I'm fully capable of deciding whether a product is right for me. For the record, when Lancome came out with that ghastly LE pink lipstick whose name I've forgotten, I knew it would look hideous on me in spite of being told by every beauty blog that this was the a "must have" color and that it was "universally flattering."
What do you guys think of the article? Does it change your opinion of the blogging world or is it a case of "tell me something I didn't already know?"
*According to one comment, The Beauty Brains is "anti-natural." I didn't respond with "No, their pro-products-that-actually-work-and-are-reasonably-priced" because I didn't want to get into a flame war.
-
I actually read it through Kristen's Beauty Addict, and I do think she was targeted a bit unfairly. She was one of the first beauty bloggers, and her blog is really well written. She's also had more press than most other beauty blogs because she's simply one of the first.
I would say.. read her response to the article. I do think the big name bloggers targeted in the article were treated unfairly.
Now.. for the BBs to be anti-natural.. that's ludicrous. They are just chemists who looks through a chemical glass into the beauty world. Natural products ARE composed of CHEMICALS, so what's the biggie? -
I caught this too...and I too have noticed that reviews of the same products pop up on various blogs simultaneously indicating a "blitz campaign" by the product's PR firm.
I find that since reviews and "must-haves " have become so commonplace on the net and in magazines I can't remember what I read where and therefore don't focus on them until I am in the market for a product and then I just search THIS forum and MakeUpAlley.
So much of product preference is PERSONAL...however I am grateful when someone like the BBs or forum members gives an honest assessment of an over-priced product that has suddenly become a "must have". REAL SIMPLE drives me mad with their recommendations...usually tend towards over-priced items!
-
I'm glad to see that Kristen responded in her blog. Of the blogs mentioned in the article, hers is the only one I read regularly . and I thought they portrayed her in an unnecessarily harsh light at the very least. At worst, it was a hatchet job. (For the record, I'm not a huge fan of the NYTimes; it's not hard to believe that they would distort facts and misrepresent things. Sometimes their attitude seems to be "Why ruin a good story by sticking to the facts?")
Anyway, the article doesn't change much for me. I'll continue to read and enjoy her blog. I hope she doesn't find herself on the receiving end of a ton of hate e-mail and give it up. -
Given the cynical tone of the article I was a bit surprised we weren't mentioned. But I guess we're not beauty "insiders" so they tend not to follow up very closely. At any rate, thanks for the kind words, everyone!
PS We were mentioned twice in the NY times last year, so I guess they don't totally ignore us. -
It's a shame that the Times chose to write a hatchet piece instead of a writing about how blogs have influenced the industry, which is what they claimed they were doing. I'd like to know how Smashbox responded to their O-Glow blush being universally panned by the blog world. They couldn't have been too thrilled when almost every blogger who reviewed it (Beauty Addict included) said that it was basically a gel that turned the same unflattering shade of bright pink on everyone. I wonder how Urban Decay will respond to complaints about their packaging now that some bloggers have demonstrated just how much waste product there is in a tube of their eye primer. There were so many things that the Times could have addressed but chose to ignore to the detriment of the article. It should have been an interesting read.
I assume Beauty Brains wasn't mentioned because discussing a blog that explains why products don't do what they claim to do didn't further their agenda. They chose targets that could be portrayed as being easily manipulated by cosmetics companies.
I don't read the Times so I wasn't aware that they had mentioned Beauty Brains twice. What did they have to say? -
Here's one of the quotes from the Times:
"But thebeautybrains.com, written by authors who describe themselves as professional cosmetic chemists, critiques the science, or lack thereof, behind products. In recent posts, for example, the blog has made fun of anti-cellulite potions and has questioned the effectiveness of protein chains called peptides that are used in some wrinkle creams."
The writer we worked with seemed to get us, it wasn't the same person who wrote the article last week. -
The NY Times is actually how I found BB in the first place.
-
I always felt most of the main stream blogs, such as the ones on iVillage, are paid to post good opinions. Which is why their "Fashionator" and the other two bloggers they have in their Beauty section always give good reviews to massively ugly and expensive things. (Even if they say they're cheap.) That's why I seek out less mainstream ones or personal blogs.
-
The world of Beauty Blogging is an interesting one. Many people start them with the hopes of getting free products. It works too because PR firms do like to send new products to beauty bloggers. And when people get something for free, they are more inclined to either write something positive or not write anything at all. That makes it much more rare that anything negative gets published.
We here at the Beauty Brains can get free samples through alternative industry connections (or make our own) so getting free stuff is not as motivating.
Having said that, we don't like to bash products. Mostly, people should make up their own minds about whether a product is worth the money or not.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!