Coming up today on Mini Scroll, Phoebe Gates shopping app
accused of affiliate fraud Breaking down Tik Tok's voice
memo guy and Margaret Quali's team denies infidelity rumors Hi
everyone. Welcome to Mini Scroll, the
daily Internet culture podcast bringing you the biggest stories
from social media, the creator economy and the digital space.
Every Monday through Thursday and sometimes Fridays.
I'm your host, Lauren Meissner, the founder of the Australian
youth digital media brand Centennial World.
Welcome back to Mini Scroll, everyone.
Happy Monday. OK, I don't think I have any
updates for you guys, but wow, have the thumbnails and the new
titles really performed. And that was the point.
And I know it's cringe. I know the thumbnails are like
so click baity. It's not my favorite vibe
either. And for years I have avoided
really like leaning into that. But I got to the point where I
was like, we are producing this show every single day.
And while it gets good numbers, like it is obviously always
growing. And I was happy with the success
and with our audience. I'm like, if we want to get to
that next level, we need to change something.
And so I worked on that little rebrand.
And even though it is cringe, I know some of you guys don't like
it, some of you do, but some of you don't.
That's fine. It has really worked like a week
in and we've already seen so many more views, so much more
engagement. So to all of our new listeners
and viewers, welcome. And sometimes when you're
building something and it's so hard, and I would say like 95%
of the time things feel like they're not working, they're
never gonna take off. Everything's always going wrong
in a start up for something to actually work out.
It's like magical, and that's what's been happening with mini
scroll across the board. Like you guys know, I keep
talking about the mini scroll TikTok, but like she is popping
the fuck off like 10 million views in six weeks.
It just makes no sense. I'm like what is going on?
So it's a very exciting time here at mini scroll.
All right, let's just get into the stories for today.
The first story that I have you guys today.
This is very mini tech coded, but it has been everywhere over
the weekend and we wanted to jump on it as soon as possible.
And of course, as a female founder myself and we are also
raising capital right now for Centennial Worlds.
Like we have a tech product that we're going to be releasing.
I've teased it here and there on the podcast for you guys over
the past couple of months. So yes, we're in the middle of
like a cap raise as well right now.
So I feel like I have an interesting or like unique
perspective. So I'm going to break it down
for you guys today instead of Annabelle breaking it down for
you on Wednesday. However, if there are any
updates it's moving forward, Annabelle will be the one to
cover it. I don't think I even told you
what the story is. So fashion tech app FIA has been
accused of faking sales. So FIA bills itself as the
Google Flights of Fashion. It's a tool that allows users to
compare prices on different items across the Internet.
A personal shopping assistant, as they say.
Users can download it as an app or use it as a browser
extension. Sophia is not necessarily
original in its core function. There are quite a few price
comparison browser extensions and tools that already exist to
help Internet users save money while online shopping.
Obviously, Honey is a little bit different, but it's definitely
the most famous example. But some factors that
differentiate FIA. First, the app has made an
effort to merge fast fashion with second hand resale when
comparing prices and purchasing. Second, they had a strong
network of investors and buzzy marketing strategies.
So some of the investors in Fiat include Khloe Kardashian, Alex
Earl, Winnie Harlow, Paris Hilton and more.
And of course, I'm sure you guys all know this, but it was Co
founded by Phoebe Gates, who is Bill Gates daughter and Sofia
Keani. So they both went to Stanford.
They definitely had some major connections and access that
other fashion tech might not have.
All right, so last week Ben Edelman, who's an independent
researcher and consultant, shared that he had been looking
into, quote, multiple forms of misconduct by PHIA.
This is a little complicated, but in the simplest terms, PHIA
generates revenue as an affiliate.
This means that the company takes the Commission on
purchases that are made using the tool.
So this may be when a user discovers a product through
Fiat, its recommendations, or something of that nature.
Many of us would be familiar with affiliates through
influencers sharing affiliate links.
We graduated from Stanford and we built.
This. It's like Google flights but for
shopping. It stops you from overpaying or
getting scammed. So.
How can it save you? Hundreds of dollars while you
shop. We used to waste hours shopping
online. Comparing prices looking for
second hand deals and wondering if we were overpaying and
nothing told us if the price was actually fair so.
We built something that. Could we had no technical
background, just a lot of frustration and a product that
barely worked at first but after months of trial and error.
We came up with this. Thea instantly tells you whether
you're overpaying and finds you new or second hand matches for
less from across the Internet. Edelman, in his review, claims
that Fia's app and Chrome plug in both include a setting that
quote automatically invokes affiliate links without user
action. So, in other words, FIA has
allegedly been making commissions on purchases even
when users are not interacting with the tool.
This is considered to be a form of fraud and is widely known as
cookie stuffing. After Edelman shared these
findings, major publications also started picking up on the
story. Bloomberg conducted its own
investigation, finding Quote, Fia's mobile browser extension,
opened a background tab with user interaction, and injected
its own referral code. By seemingly taking credit for a
sale like this, Fiat is allegedly making unearned
commissions. So if this is the case, Fiat can
override the actual referrals or the actual affiliates.
Retailers may also have been paying Fiat unnecessary fees, so
the journalist spoke to Edelman, who explained Quote.
The most fundamental requirement in affiliate marketing is that
Commission is only paid if a user clicks.
The rules don't allow fake clicks, simulated clicks,
imaginary clicks or hypothetical clicks.
Only a real click will do. Now, if you did respond to
Bloomberg's request for comment, the spokesperson characterized
the issue as a bug in the code as opposed to something
intentional. Quote within the last 24 hours.
We were made aware that in a recent release, our code base
was causing misattributions from a subset of users.
As soon as we were notified, our team worked overnight to
identify, mitigate, and has since resolved the issue.
Bloomberg has since retested the browser extension, finding that
it did indeed stop claiming referral links.
OK, so while researchers and publications claim the issue has
been rectified, that does not mean that things are over for
FIA. Major affiliate platform
impact.com suspended FIA due to this behavior, noting that this
is quote, inconsistent with our platform policies.
TikTok users are taking to the platform in droves to discuss
what this means for fashion tech, female founders and
affiliate marketing online as a whole.
The take that I am seeing pretty frequently in comment sections
and from KC Lewis specifically, who's the author of the after
school newsletter, is that by quote, UN quote overriding
commissions, FIA may have been taking revenue from smaller
publishers and also from influencers and creators.
So in the context of publishers, there are smaller and smaller
budgets available. We talk about this all the time
in AD sales, so any added revenue could be useful.
Publishers have long considered affiliate commissions as an
additional revenue stream and publishing listicles is one
example of that. And then from the influencer or
creator side, if a user had downloaded the Fiat app on their
phone and they also follow a bunch of fashion influencers,
probably that crossover is pretty strong, right?
And they click on an affiliate link from an influencer, let's
say on Instagram or something. And they already had FIA
downloaded on their iOS. It is possible that FIA could
have been taking credit for their purchase through the
influencers affiliate link that they found on their Instagram
swipe up or something like that or their LTK, their shop.
My I saw people in the comments section as well saying that
influencers apparently have been voicing their concerns around
their lack of commissions from shop My, saying that it seems
like the Commission from shop my is going missing.
I have not verified this but I have seen it in the comments
sections and so this could possibly explain why because VIA
was claiming that the sales were coming from them when the
purchaser actually used a shop my affiliate link or something
like that. Via claims to have 1.5 million
users. Now I don't know that we can
necessarily take their word for it, but we can assume that they
have a very large user base. The way this cookie stuffing
works is they were inserting their code into every single
purchase, whether they were the one who was recommending the
item or not. I think most of us on this app
know how affiliate revenue works.
I recommend this shirt. You go and buy it on j.crew.
I see, you know, a dollar or $5. And for companies like FIA or
plugins like Honey or websites like Wire Cutter, they recommend
these things. They connect you to the product.
They see a cut of that. And what FIA was doing was
interjecting their code so the money wouldn't go to wire Cutter
or Honey or me the influencer. I'm not an influencer.
When we think about the Venn diagram of the influencers we
follow in love and the people who have FIA on their phones and
laptops, there's tons of overlap.
I suspect just based on Fias marketing target audience and
Phoebe Gates reach right that is a huge overlapping audience.
So think about all of the influencers over the last.
I don't know how long this bug has been in the code.
Via has potentially allegedly gotten, I don't know, millions
of dollars that would otherwise be going to these influencers
who are doing the work of recommending the.
Stuff. OK, so there's also quite a bit
of discourse around what this means for fashion tech and for
female founders more broadly. Sophia has recently raised 35
million USD in funding from investors, an amount that raises
questions about whether some of those same investors refused to
support rival fashion tech products, given how buzzy Fiat
has become both. Are asking the question whoa,
shouldn't the investors have done due diligence and uncovered
that this company was using cookie stuffing?
If you go to. Ben's site, which I think you
really should if you're interested in this, go to the
primary source. Ben walks through the code
review that he did and he shows that the cookie cookie stuffing
was actually happening on iOS only.
I think this is really important because Ben, who has been doing
investigative work into this category for 20 years, said that
he had never seen anything like this.
He had never seen cookie stuffing done on iOS only.
He commented as such on my LinkedIn post, basically saying
that traditionally when cooking stuff, cookie stuffing is done,
it's done on desktop. And I think that in a typical
Series A due diligence process, which is what this was, you
would absolutely do a code review.
I'm not expecting Alex Earl to do a code review.
I'm not expecting Khloe Kardashian or Kim Kardashian to
do code review, but I am expecting notable capital Khosla
and major venture firms to do a code review.
But I think what's interesting is because cookie stuffing on
iOS is novel, it likely could be missed in a typical due
diligence process. And of course with the female
founder angle it is harder to be a female founder.
People take you way less seriously.
You are under a microscope in a way that a lot of times male
founders are just not. For every Fiat, there's probably
like 100 male founded companies that are doing just as shady
stuff. I know there's a lot of people
who are like what FIA is doing. It is a it's a very shady and I
think a legal practice, but a lot of companies have done it.
OK, but like that doesn't make it right.
And there is much more of a microscope on FIA because they
have chosen to go this very like public flashy route, right?
The founders obviously had profile before this and then
they launched a podcast that aligns with their brand.
They're going on every single podcast, they're doing tons of
press, they're getting a list celebrities to invest in their
brand. They're raising all this money.
Like there is such a spotlight on them because they are using
that spotlight to fuel the success of their business.
So yes, female founders absolutely are under more
scrutiny. Male founders are absolutely
allowed to mess up way more than female founders.
But this is not a witch hunt. Like what has allegedly happened
here is very, very, very bad. It's very serious.
And this criticism is incredibly valid.
And it's important that we look at it right and that we
understand what's happened here and why it's wrong and that
there are consequences that happened here.
And those two things can exist together.
Like female founders can face way more criticism, way more
scrutiny. It can be way harder for them.
And this can also be a really, really, really seriously bad
situation where there need to be consequences.
All right. And the next story that I have
for you guys today, OK, I'm going to break down the
situation going on around voice memo guy.
Basically, a voice memo from a man is going viral on TikTok.
It was sent privately to a woman after their first date and later
shared on the app. Not shared by the sender it
seems, but by their friend. Essentially.
In the audio he says he had a good time on their first date
and wants to see her again, but only if she is willing to have
sex. Here is the voice memo and
trigger warning for after this voice memo.
I am going to get into some opinions and some of the
discourse where people feel like this was possibly sexual
coercion. Had a good time tonight,
definitely think you are lovely. However I would love to if we're
going to go to your place on Thursday.
I mean, I am looking to have that physical intimacy to see if
like I am sexually compatible with you.
So like if I'm going to come over like I would be hoping to
like hook up, have sex, have a good time, have like that
romantic spark and that physical spark there for my own sake.
Because it's hard for me to continue dating if dating
someone and seeing them if I don't know if I'm sexually
compatible. So I know you said I don't know
about that. So like, I guess my thing is is
like, what would be the point of me coming over then if we're not
going to like hook up and like cuddle and like be intimate with
each other. And if that's what you don't
want, that's fine. But like, I think we should just
like end it here then respectfully, just because I
first date, that's fine. Like you want to get to know
each other. I'm all about that.
But like I am looking to have that physical aspect there and I
don't want to continue seeing someone if I don't know if
that's good. If that's not, they're not so up
to you. Let me know.
I'm happy to if you do want me to come over, I'm happy to do
so. Would love to fuck, have a good
time and you know we can have some wine, hang out and chill
but if you're not trying to hook up then like I think we should
just go our separate ways. Let me know.
OK, so dating content tends to go viral on TikTok, so the
virality itself is not surprising.
But traction really spiked after TikTok user at Ted Kaczynski's
great friend shared their take on The Voice memo.
So she was basically team voice memo guy, and she framed it as
an example of consent in action. That response video hit 2
million views in five days. She turned the comments off, but
she since posted over 10 follow up videos defending the stance.
Anyways, the discussion has evolved into a broader consent
versus coercion debate, with many questioning whether the man
was actually practicing consent. In follow-ups, she doubled down,
arguing quote purity culture is worse than I realized and that
viewers have the quote emotional acuity of 12 year olds.
A video went viral last week of a girl that got a voice note
from a guy that she was dating and he was basically saying hey,
if we're going to continue hanging out, I just want you to
know that I am seeking a sexual connection.
And if you don't want to explore a sexual connection, then we
should probably just end this now because a sexual connection
is a priority to me. And this was presented as a
negative thing. And the comments were littered
with people saying men aren't lonely enough etcetera etcetera.
And I was sitting there thinking this is what consent looks like.
Y'all Like we discussed the concept of consent so much but I
don't think people actually understand what it looks like.
And that voice note is what consent looks like.
It is blunt, it is raw, it is obvious.
And that guy gave the girl a chance to be like, oh, OK, this
is moving too quickly for me and that's not how I want to conduct
us dating right now. The main pushback against the
claim that he was practicing consent is that the man actually
just put forth an ultimatum. Consent is a mutual agreement,
while an ultimatum is demand that requires someone else to
change their behavior for whatever reason. 1 is about
respect and the other is about pressure.
And he makes that pretty clear because he says in one part of
this voice note that he knows that she wasn't like fully down
for that before. As in presumably having sex with
him so soon. So one TikTok user named
Priscilla made some very good points around all of this.
Who? Cannot get consent from somebody
while giving them an ultimatum. That's not consent according to
RAIN. Look up what that acronym means.
I can't say it on here. Consent is a mutual agreement to
engage in intimate activity. It should always be clear,
voluntary and communicated without pressure, manipulation
or fear. It should always be clear.
Let's not forget that he already tried to ask for her consent.
Hence why he said I know, you already said I don't know.
I don't know is not clear consent.
No consent folks sent must be communicated without pressure,
manipulation or fear. Others argue that this is like a
low stakes ultimatum because they only went on one date and
they don't really owe each other anything.
And I hate the you don't owe anyone anything narrative that
just runs free and wild all over social media these past couple
of years. I think that framing minimizes
what is happening in that voice memo.
He is stating what he wants, yes, but he's also saying that
he will disengage if his expectations are not met.
The reason that the argument of this is great consent practice
feels so disingenuous to so many people is because everyone who's
making that argument is reframing that voice note to
quite a large degree. They're making it sound like
something very different from what it actually is.
You know, every single video I've seen where people are
saying, yeah, this is good consent practice, they've
started it by saying, so this guy sent this woman a voice note
to find out whether or not sex was on the table.
So then I went to listen to that voice note and I was expecting
something totally different from what I got.
Because I think there's a big difference between finding out
whether or not someone is open to a sexual connection with you
before you, like, get more serious with them.
There's a big difference between that and saying I'm not
interested in getting to know you anymore unless we have sex
on the second date. There is no compromise here.
They've been on one date they don't even know each other like
at all. For him to be like if you don't
fuck me on the 2nd date then we're done.
That is not consent in practice. He's not having a conversation
about this with her. This is not boundary setting.
I've seen so many people saying he's setting a boundary.
That is not what a boundary is. A boundary is something that you
impose on yourself to protect yourself or to set a certain
standard for yourself. Genuine consent involves
continuous agreement, mutual respect, and boundaries that
both people are setting for themselves, themselves.
It isn't just like one person laying out what is going to
happen next. And part of the nuance here as
well is the consideration of like, who is on the receiving
end of that voice memo? Because there would be people
that would receive this and be like, wow, fuck you, buddy and
block him and never talk to him again.
Or there's other women who might be more susceptible to that kind
of pressure. And clarity is another really
important part of practicing consent, which is definitely
something that he does in this voice memo.
But the way he delivers his desires is so transactional,
which undermines kind of like any social construct when it
comes to building healthy relationships with somebody,
sexual or romantic. Like, at the end of the day, we
actually do owe each other common courtesy and decency.
And a video by Good Noticing's podcast speaks very well to
this. The voice note guy is a symptom
of the culture that is out here litigating that voice note as
like either consent culture king hero or coercion culture evil
villain. When everything is black and
white, then it like reduces people into treating other
people as if we're like in a computer game, saying all the
right words in order to get exactly what we want.
We have like completely lost the ability of how to interact with
one another. I am a single person.
I have a lot of single female friends.
And I would say all of us have dealt with a situation like this
where like, most of us are OK with like casual situations.
However, you don't want to feel like your only purpose is to
like, have sex with this. Like the, the way this guy
approached this, maybe she was down for a casual thing, but
approaching it in this way is like, makes you feel like shit.
And yeah, that's because of societal conditioning, because
we live in a society. There are social contracts,
there are ways to treat each other, there's nuance, and
there's ways to move about a situation.
And everyone is so fucking gleeful to like, tear up these
social contracts and proceed with everyone just like looking
at each other like fucking robots and ordering human
interactions. Like you order stuff off a menu.
Like this, I would say, isn't like consent culture or coercion
culture. I would argue it's like we don't
owe each other anything Culture. And those who see the voice memo
as either coercion or as an ultimatum or manipulative,
they're not saying that communicating your needs in a
relationship or in a new partnership, anything that's
going on when you're early and dating like that, that is not
important. They're not saying that a sexual
relationship isn't important in a romantic relationship.
If you're going to start dating somebody, all of that is
incredibly valid. But that is not what he was
doing here. There was no opportunity for
response. There was no proper
communication like a back and forth conversation around
consent and the stages that they were getting to.
They've gone on one single date. We can't look at situations like
this as black and white. We can't look at it as like, OK,
this guy communicated what he wants from this relationship and
therefore green tick, there's so much Gray in every situation in
any type of like interpersonal relationship situation
conversation. And this voice memo, if you have
listened to it from start to finish, it is not a green flag.
All right. And the last story that I have
for you guys today is Margaret Crawley has denied infidelity
rumors. So we covered the news that
Margaret Crawley and Jack Anchinoff had split on
Thursday's episode, but I have a quick update.
As the Internet often does, people were speculating why the
pair were separating after three years of marriage.
Some social media users believed that there was infidelity
involved. One of the more popular theories
online was that Margaret was romantically involved with her
Co star Drew Starkey. However, users were also
skeptical about Jack Anchinoff's behavior, especially after
Margaret archived and then unarchived their pictures
together. People were questioning whether
there was some resentment on Margaret's end, so
representatives on behalf of Margaret issued a statement to
People denying claims of infidelity.
As it reads quote, the narratives running in the press
about Margaret and Jack are categorically untrue.
There are no trust issues. There was no infidelity or
anything outside of respect and partnership in this
relationship. They have deep love and care for
one another. There are only two people in
this marriage and the sources who are talking to the press and
commenting on their privacy are not people who know them.
Please respect their privacy. Jack Antonoff's team has not
responded to People's request for comment.
OK, so since we reported on their split last week, there has
been a lot of conversation about Jack's relationship with Lena
Dunham. In Fame Sick, which was Lena's
memoir, she spoke about their six year relationship where she
admitted to cheating on him. This came after he developed a
close bond with an unnamed teenage pop star during that
time, who many believe to be lured, though never confirmed,
and Lena says she felt cast aside as a result.
There is an iconic piece of Internet lore associated with
all of this, a 29 page presentation created by a
Twitter user breaking down why she believed Lord and producer
Jack Antonoff had an emotional affair and that it led to Trump
being in the White House. Lord and Jack Antonoff are
responsible for the Trump presidency.
You haven't heard of the PowerPoint?
Allow me to enlighten you. In 2018, a manic genius Hillary
Benton created this PowerPoint detailing every piece of
evidence she could find that 20 year old Lord had an 18 month
long affair with 34 year old Jack Antonov, who was dating his
longtime girlfriend Lena Dunham at the time.
The PowerPoint also argues that the entire album Melodrama,
which is supposedly about her another creepy, gross older
boyfriend, is actually about Jack Antonoff, Lena Dunham,
actress, producer, and prominent millennial outreach lobbyist for
the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign, for which
she was on the road for about 18 months.
How long did the album Melodrama take to produce while she was
out of town and a 20 year old was sleeping on her couch,
breaking closely with her boyfriend?
18 months. And who failed to win over the
young and millennial voters in the 2016 campaign, resulting in
this orange man to take office for the first time.
You see where we're going with. This.
So yeah. Now, one of the main theories,
aside from infidelity is that Margaret read Fame Sick and that
prompted her to rethink her relationship with Jack.
I don't personally subscribe to that.
I do not think that this really had much to do with Lena
Dunham's book. I think what we talked about on
Thursday is probably more valid, which is that he didn't seem to
like treat her very well throughout the relationship.
Like from what we saw, obviously, we have actually no
idea. But like from what we thought
publicly, he didn't seem to be like a great partner to her.
And I feel like she's on such an ascension and she is like such a
freaking it girl now. And I mean, that's only just
going to like keep going for her now that I I feel like at some
point she was just done. That's my opinion anyways, guys,
that's it for mini scroll today. Thank you so much for listening.
I love you guys. Please remember to rate review
and subscribe. Please Spotify star rate US.
It helps us so much. It helps us grow.
And I will talk to you guys tomorrow.
Bye. Centennial World podcast network
operates on Gadigal land. We would like to acknowledge the
Gadigal of the Eora Nation, the traditional custodians of this
land, and pay our respects to elders both past and present.