Every Founder is Giving the Performance of a Lifetime.

Will the curtains actually close on Matilda Djerf? And why is Gen Z so upset with the 'inauthenticity' of her online persona, when they're all constructing an online persona, too?

“Fans turn on influencer Matilda Djerf over claims she viciously bullied staff.”

“Staff accuse influencer of ‘psychologic terror’ in toxic workplace.”

“Staff member forced to scrub Matilda’s personal toilet.”

The press and primarily Tik Tok have been abuzz with shock, horror and disgust toward Swedish influencer and business mogul Matilda Djerf ever since last week’s Aftonbladet expose cited her alleged workplace harassment of current and former employees. Matilda has been influencing part-time since 2016, full-time since 2018, and launched her eponymous label in 2019 with her boyfriend, now the company’s CEO. On podcasts, Matilda reports the company is doing over 35 million in revenue, driven by, from the looks of it, Gen Z and young millennials who aspire toward her tutti-fruity-meets-clean-girl Scandi vibe, picturesque, rich-girl aesthetic and eye-bag-free, jet-setting lifestyle.

At least, that’s what I thought. But what I discovered, instead, was that Djerf Avenue’s primary consumers were less drawn to Matilda’s material bonafides, and more so to her aura of goodness, generosity, and sweetness - and the fact that she could get so far with such a good heart. She is Glinda the Good Witch, if you took her out of Oz and put her in a strawberry-dotted pajama sipping tea along the Swedish countryside.

She is Glinda the Good Witch, if you took her out of Oz and put her in a strawberry-dotted pajama sipping tea along the Swedish countryside.

When the Aftonbladet bombshell dropped, my best friend DM’d it to me on Tik Tok immediately. For years, I’ve been obsessed with the validity and frivolity of female founder take-downs: why they happen, why journalists - mostly female journalists - never write similar hit pieces on male founders, and why we as a society gobble these pieces up like calorie-free pepperoni pizza. The comments sections of these pieces, and their corresponding reddit threads, are always extremely depressing. There’s always a similar takeaway: on some gut, bestial level, women do not want other women to succeed. They resent that other women are prettier, richer, and more successful than they are, and they get giddy and horny and happy when an ambitious, hot, wealthy woman gets cancelled.

Enter: the Matilda scandal. I’m not into Scandi fashion or Scandi…anything really, and I’m not swayed or inspired by influencer culture, at least not on a conscious level. I don’t buy something because I see so-and-so wearing it on vacation with their hubby in their latest Insta. I don’t obsessively follow any big influencers or influencers period, unless it’s people I know personally that also inspire me off the screen, like Brooklynn Gallagher, which is how I discovered Matilda Djerf in the first place. Brooklynn bought a blazer from Djerf Avenue soon after the line launched, and I became vaguely aware of Matilda and the brand from that. Brooklynn, who is famous on Tik Tok for helping women sizes 8-12 find fashionable fits that flatter and inspire confidence, was immediately attracted to Djerf Avenue’s stated mission of size inclusivity, body positivity, and representation. Brooklynn often speaks out in personal conversations and on Tik Tok about how hard it is for mid-size women to find well-made, nicely-tailored fashion staples. Djerf offers sizing up to 3XL, and the “Transparency” section of their site lists other Gen Z and Millennial-beloved buzzwords like “human rights,”“ethical production,” “women-dominated team,” "safe space” “ethical labor practices” - the list goes on.

I watched the Aftonbladet report in full to take stock of the various accusations and understand if and how they lined up with the company’s written promises. Here’s a quick summary of the claims:

• Matilda has her own toilet at work and refuses to let other employees use it. Djerf Avenue has confirmed this in a written apology but claims it is for the employees’ own “health.” (?) okee.

• One time, an employee did in fact use her personal bathroom. Matilda scolded her and made her scrub the toilet before she would use it again.

• Matilda has called models “too fat” to employees during photoshoots. I quote: “We have to reshoot this, because she looks so fucking fat in these clothes. We can’t show that.”

• She has lined up employees side by side to berate them about how bad they are at their jobs.

• Overall psychological abuse, mood swings and behaviors that cause crying and emotional distress.

In scouring the rest of Tik Tok for the internet’s hot takes on the report’s accusations, no one brought up the company’s promises shared on the website. Not a single post. Instead, many brought up how kind, loving, gentle, sweet and innocent Matilda seemed online. They completely ignored her company’s literal written claims, and instead zoned in on Matilda’s founder performance. The comments sections, primarily, discuss how nice she seemed. They all share some sort of dialogue about the person she presented, shock around the claims in the report, and then other commenters chime in saying her persona is just a brand, and that it’s silly to be confused or shocked by her behavior. Some examples and clips:

I would never think this pretty soul would ever do that I literally can’t believe that it’s true

So this is the Matilda Djerf We’re Talking About?

“She is so soft spoken and gentle in her videos, I’m shocked.”

Because when the younger demo shops Rare Beauty, it’s as though they’re directly supporting Selena Gomez. Like she’s a small business owner with a lemonade stand on the street corner, schilling “Take Your Lexapro” lipliner with a $14.99 Arnold Palmer.

This entire scandal reminded me of something Nick and Annie brought up in a recent episode of

Eyewitness Beauty

, when they discussed Gen Z beauty trends and habits with

Casey Lewis

. For them - and me - the Selena Gomez / Rare Beauty phenomenon is quite discombobulating. The product naming conventions and the late-stage-capitalism-coded reliance on mental health motifs like “Find Comfort” body cream and “Stay Vulnerable” glossy lip balm beg the question: who the fuck is buying this? To me, it’s pandering 101. But according to Casey, a lot of girlies are spending a pretty penny on Rare, an it’s because when the younger demo shops the brand, it’s as though they’re directly supporting Selena Gomez. Like she’s a small business owner with a lemonade stand on the street corner, schilling “Take Your Lexapro” lipliner with a $14.99 Arnold Palmer.

And so, the most infuriating and disorienting feeling for Djerf Avenue customers was not that the company broke its promises. Nope. It’s that Matilda - the person they were supporting, the girlie with the 35-million-dollar “lemonade stand” - was not who she claimed to be.

What I truly cannot comprehend is how consumers don’t understand, from the get-go, that founders - regardless of whether they’re influencers or actresses or simply CEOs - are giving the performance of a lifetime, one pitch, Instagram post and networking event at a time.

As a 2x and exited founder, I know this first-hand. In my eight years at Bulletin, a wholesale marketplace and now tradeshow for gift, lifestyle and accessory brands, I met and supported thousands of founders across every category. The most successful ones turn the role into full-blown performance art. It becomes their entire identity. The smartest ones, like Matilda, understand their consumer on such a freakish and disturbingly psychological level that they morph into the precise person the consumer wants to be, support and emulate. Matilda, like all of us, cannot be nice and warm and kind and sweet every hour of every day in real life. She will have bad days. She will have mean days. She will be a downright bitch. But on Instagram, she can perform the “Matilda” that gets you to follow, like, subscribe, share, save, shop, and shop again. Going through the various Tik Toks and Tik Tok comments that seemed oblivious to this completely blew my mind, especially because her customer - young millennials and Get Z - are themselves crafting a social avatar and performing a hyper-curated version of themselves every single day. Why would Matilda be any different, especially when she has $130 robes to sell you? Sorry, but are you really that stupid?

Young millennials and Get Z - are themselves crafting a social avatar and performing a hyper-curated version of themselves every single day. Why would Matilda be any different, especially when she has $130 robes to sell you? Sorry, but are you really that stupid?

I suppose I’m writing this to pull the curtain back for anyone reading who hasn’t clocked it yet: you have no idea who your favorite founder actually is, or how they treat their employees, or the people not on their payroll. Anything they’re feeding you on Tik Tok, Instagram, or Substack (sorry!), is in the name of company growth (codeword: revenue) or “personal brand,” which…ultimately rolls up to revenue. Sorry again! There’s a funnel at work here, guys, and it all dribbles down to “add to cart.” The founder’s personal socials are at the tippy top. If the founders behind the companies you love are consistently posting to these channels, chances are they have content calendars, content pillars of some kind, an editorial strategy - either swirling in their head or literally written down somewhere, an aesthetic guide or vision for how that content needs to look, and feelings and goals they’re trying to stir up from you as a consumer of that content.

And - hot take - we should respect the work they’re putting into those channels and the effort they’re taking to build that personal brand and their company at-large. It’s challenging, tiring, and basically two full-time jobs. Managing and CEO-ing your company AND being a full or part-time content creator is dizzying. I’m not sharing this because I judge it or feel cynical about it. In fact, I feel the opposite. I know this is where CPG, beauty and lifestyle marketing has been and is going, and I believe B2B marketing is headed this way, too. Given my network, I have a lot of insider information on what brands are actually making money, and I can say with complete conviction that the ones with an identifiable and committed founder - the ones with founders who have gone Full Method, who are the Performance Artist, who make it their entire public identity and their entire life - are fucking rolling in it.

Given my network, I have a lot of insider information on what brands are actually making money, and I can say with complete conviction that the ones with an identifiable and committed founder - the ones with founders who have gone Full Method, who are the Performance Artist, who make it their entire public identity and their entire life - are fucking rolling in it.

Matilda’s marketing strategy was dead-on. Maybe there were a few days where she should’ve just…stayed home. Or maybe she needs to hire an experienced CEO, and an executive coach, and do an honest-to-god, lay-it-on-me-style Company Offsite with the team members impacted. TBH, she should do all the above. She and that lemonade stand can surely afford it.

Regarding this delusional consumer, I hope this incident helps these younger generations reset and rethink why they’re supporting a brand. In my eyes, the reason to shop and support a brand is because

1. the products are well-made

2. the brand’s story, ethos and overall vibe fit your personal style and aesthetic

3. and you believe that owning the item or items from that brand will improve your life in some small or significant way.

If you feel that Djerf Avenue’s mostly-polyester clothing fits the bill, then keep supporting.

If you like Rare Beauty’s products and the quality, price point and packaging does something for you - naming conventions aside - then stock up on that Lexapro lip liner. Why not?

But to support a brand because their founder “seems” nice or sweet, or their founder “seems” cool, or their founder is “goals” for who you want to be someday, is setting you up for disappointment.

Because if that founder becomes successful enough, there will always be a disgruntled employee who posts to Tik Tok, Instagram or Twitter claiming mistreatment. What do you do then? There will be no way to validate whether that employee was actually mistreated, or ways to vet or assess their claims. Heck - we won’t even know if they were good at their job! The number of times I’ve seen employees do this to my friends, or people I know, or one time - to me - and in the background, the employee was 100% the issue… you’ll want to side with the employee over the founder, because they’re closer to your socioeconomic status or age or maybe you’ll both be in social media. Who knows! But there’s a likelihood you’re GREAT at your job, and this chick stole money from the company! Seriously. It happens.

Or if that founder becomes rich enough, there will always be someone interrogating her origin story. People will whisper about her parents, or her husband, or how she grew up. Right after I sold my company, I launched my consulting website and was looking on the backend of Google Analytics. The most googled things about me were “Ali Kriegsman net worth” and “Ali Kriegsman parents.” Net worth - I understand. The Bulletin exit was unconventional and no one knows how much money I made, which I’ll never share publicly. But as for the second one - people, mostly women, will always want to excuse away your success. And for the record: my mom is a first-generation American from the Bronx, and runs her own small business in Los Angeles helping California keep its labor force within the state versus across the border or overseas. And my dad is unemployed, on Medicaid, and hasn’t worked in 15 years. So my success is all mine. Thanks for asking.

Lastly, if your favorite founder fails - then what? Do you not like the products anymore? Do you suddenly ditch the brand, despite the quality of the product being exactly the same?

Attaching to a person and their “vibe,” or how they seem online - is an insanely naive way to develop affinity for a company - but it is now the norm. Naive, I say, because everyone is fake online. But with brands that have concrete offerings like products, online user experiences, email marketing, and customer service - there are so many opportunities to fall for the real thing, instead of a constructed performance its founder is giving you as part of a larger marketing machine.

Talk soon,

Ali 🧘‍♀️