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?
"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."
Okay wait. So she (supposedly? Let's say it's true) bullied her employees, created a fake persona, lured people to her brand while it wasn't who she is.. and you're blaming the consumer? The 16 year-old girls who want to be happier, cuter, and look nicer in a world that says they're not good enough?
I think it's great that founders are kept responsible for a brand that's built up based on them. I think we actually CAN expect people to be honest and real. If you can keep yourself accountable to do that, you can keep others accountable to do that.
Besides, not everybody has inside information about how brands and companies and funnels works. Yes, that might be naive, but still the fault lies by the deceiver - not the deceived.
Anyway - I found your piece very well-written and interesting (had no idea who this girl was beforehand haha) but don't agree with your takes. I do appreciate you writing it so thoroughly and always love to see new perspectives!
Agreed. Where is the idea of being an honorable person? It might be uneven scale we're judging women on over men but power corrupts. I'm not blaming the consumer.
Hi Monique. I agree I did not do enough to explore this in the piece, which Melissa phrased so perfectly: what responsibility lies with the deceiver versus the deceived. I explored the "inside baseball" of why Matilda is basically a walking marketing ploy for her brand - 'ploy' being the key word here. But I didn't do enough to uncover why running that ploy on young, impressionable women - specifically - is dangerous and potentially dishonorable, to your point. Especially if behind closed doors, she was acting in complete misalignment from the values presented by the brand and her social media. I appreciate both you and Melissa bringing this up, and I'm excited to think more thoroughly about these angles as I publish future pieces. I really enjoy getting feedback like this from readers - it challenges me to be a little less navel gazey and ask myself new questions as I write.
Hi Melissa - thank you for reading and replying. I really appreciate this take and totally see where you are coming from, and you challenged me to think about something here which I hadn't when composing the piece. I wasn't really aware that this brand's consumer base was that young. I figured it was more so 20 - 27 year olds given Matilda herself is 27, and the pricepoint is def beyond what I could have afforded at that age. But you're completely right that I should've looked a bit deeper there and not made those assumptions. That wasn't the right approach on my part. Consumers that young *cannot* discern between founder "performance" and the reality of building a funnel to get sales, versus believing the founder is who she presents herself to be. In that case, no, it would be irresponsible for me to blame the consumer. You're 100% right.
I also agree that we can and should expect people to be honest and real, and that business leaders should see it as part of their job to hold themselves accountable and plug-in holes where they are weak. I actually love what Dianna Cohen, the founder and former CEO of Crown Affair, just said about this in Business of Fashion: https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/beauty/how-crown-affair-became-the-queen-of-it-girl-hair-care/
The article is gated, but she basically said that she was weak on numbers/quant stuff and stronger on brand, so from the beginning, she had Eileen, their president, in the mix to make sure that part of the biz was air-tight. If Matilda was not an experienced manager or naturally good with people or accountability, she should've hired someone in, even part-time, to fill that essential function at the company early on. This is *obviously* a very different ballgame than the Crown Affair example, but it shows the mindset of a strong and responsible leader and how they hire around their weaknesses, which I guess Matilda did not do.
I want all young women to be happier, cuter, and look nicer in a world that says they're not good enough!!! And I agree that the fault should rest more with the deceiver - not the deceived. As a marketer, I have the inside baseball, so this shit is obvious to me. But I'm not a vulnerable 16 year old girl. And I forgot that.
Ty for reading and engaging and your thoughtful approach to your reply, and always love to hear that anything I create is well-written.
Hot and refreshing take. The person became the brand, the brand became the person. It’s really no different than buying a ticket to a movie because your favorite actor is in it. This is about believing that if you better yourself, a perfect life is just around the corner. The charismatic pitch draws you in. The constant confirmation that it is literally just around the corner makes you stay. If I give my money to someone good, am I also good??
"It’s really no different than buying a ticket to a movie because your favorite actor is in it." DAMN. Had never made that jump, but I honestly love it. Thank you for taking it there. Just gave me a lot to think about. It's really this notion of separating the maker from the product. I think we see it a LOT in music and entertainment, like wtf do we do about loving or playing Michael Jackson's music now that.. you know.... but it doesn't get framed like this as much in entrepreneurship.
Welcome to the ADHD brain 😂 you caught my intent completely . Would I still listen to the song or see the movie even if the image I have in my head of this other person is shattered? Would I see the movie, even if it wasn’t that good because I just love the actor. I don’t think there is a right answer to the first question. Does the art stand alone or can only be enjoyed if the creator was a good person, I’d have to assume there are many more songs and movies and products we would then no longer consume if we really knew.
This defines my anxiety of simply existing as a founder, and before that an employee with a public Instagram. I often wonder if because I don’t share certain things about my life—the ones which make me seem vulnerable or imperfect or “relatable”—I’m hurting my likability. I also don’t share my highest “highlights” because I know I would need to temper them with the “lowlights” to not come off as gloating. But I don’t want to exploit my personal life or mental health to boost engagement, even though it seems like the most impactful way to build a cult as a public figure. This is having me a rash.
it’s quite the catch 22. i think the answer here lies in what your (the big Your not Annie’s “your”) ultimate goals are as a person and business owner. it seems like these days, if you want to make a ton of money, you have to either say “screw likability” and deprioritize that totally, going ham with your highs and owning that ur *that* girl (which annie, u r). i feel like the sporty and rich founder does this, Kayali fragrance founder mona kattan, too. her IG is a trip. and do this knowing it’ll turn people off, but you’ll make money. or you do the likability thing like most founders do and share the highs and lows, exploiting your personal life as you say - but it seems that won’t be an authentic approach. so why do it if it doesn’t feel right? i do think there are plenty of brands now that are not very founder forward that do a beautiful job, have great distribution and have been growing: Eadem is one i love. i think Topicals is an example of a brand with a strong founder who does not do the highs lows thing, actually, and i for one am endlessly rooting for her + the team and never see it as gloating! but yes rashes abound. tho i for one am excited for whatever ur launching in 2025, and whatever strategy you go with, i’m buying 💸
Oh I feel this so deeply. I think this post answers your question exactly - what are you trying to accomplish? Monetizing your followers and want to optimize this to its fullest - be as likable as possible. Want to connect and build community - be as real as possible.
Want both - be as real as possible and be happy with a smaller slice of the total pie.
Man this is so good. When you think about it, we’re all content creators - some to a greater degree/following than others - and everything we project online is a persona. It’s crazy how easily people cling on to personas and how much it influences them. It doesn’t really matter who a person truly is, but rather what they’re selling. And even if the individual betrays the viewers’ perceptions of what they’re selling, rarely do they suffer large consequences - the aesthetic and image must live on.
omg yes happy to! Rare Beauty uses a lot of empowering schticky names for their products like “always an optimist soft radiance powder” and “stay vulnerable” liquid eyeshadow so it was a light poke at that :)
"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."
This is so gooooood!!!
so transparent!
thank you Casey!!!
Okay wait. So she (supposedly? Let's say it's true) bullied her employees, created a fake persona, lured people to her brand while it wasn't who she is.. and you're blaming the consumer? The 16 year-old girls who want to be happier, cuter, and look nicer in a world that says they're not good enough?
I think it's great that founders are kept responsible for a brand that's built up based on them. I think we actually CAN expect people to be honest and real. If you can keep yourself accountable to do that, you can keep others accountable to do that.
Besides, not everybody has inside information about how brands and companies and funnels works. Yes, that might be naive, but still the fault lies by the deceiver - not the deceived.
Anyway - I found your piece very well-written and interesting (had no idea who this girl was beforehand haha) but don't agree with your takes. I do appreciate you writing it so thoroughly and always love to see new perspectives!
Agreed. Where is the idea of being an honorable person? It might be uneven scale we're judging women on over men but power corrupts. I'm not blaming the consumer.
Hi Monique. I agree I did not do enough to explore this in the piece, which Melissa phrased so perfectly: what responsibility lies with the deceiver versus the deceived. I explored the "inside baseball" of why Matilda is basically a walking marketing ploy for her brand - 'ploy' being the key word here. But I didn't do enough to uncover why running that ploy on young, impressionable women - specifically - is dangerous and potentially dishonorable, to your point. Especially if behind closed doors, she was acting in complete misalignment from the values presented by the brand and her social media. I appreciate both you and Melissa bringing this up, and I'm excited to think more thoroughly about these angles as I publish future pieces. I really enjoy getting feedback like this from readers - it challenges me to be a little less navel gazey and ask myself new questions as I write.
Hi Melissa - thank you for reading and replying. I really appreciate this take and totally see where you are coming from, and you challenged me to think about something here which I hadn't when composing the piece. I wasn't really aware that this brand's consumer base was that young. I figured it was more so 20 - 27 year olds given Matilda herself is 27, and the pricepoint is def beyond what I could have afforded at that age. But you're completely right that I should've looked a bit deeper there and not made those assumptions. That wasn't the right approach on my part. Consumers that young *cannot* discern between founder "performance" and the reality of building a funnel to get sales, versus believing the founder is who she presents herself to be. In that case, no, it would be irresponsible for me to blame the consumer. You're 100% right.
I also agree that we can and should expect people to be honest and real, and that business leaders should see it as part of their job to hold themselves accountable and plug-in holes where they are weak. I actually love what Dianna Cohen, the founder and former CEO of Crown Affair, just said about this in Business of Fashion: https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/beauty/how-crown-affair-became-the-queen-of-it-girl-hair-care/
The article is gated, but she basically said that she was weak on numbers/quant stuff and stronger on brand, so from the beginning, she had Eileen, their president, in the mix to make sure that part of the biz was air-tight. If Matilda was not an experienced manager or naturally good with people or accountability, she should've hired someone in, even part-time, to fill that essential function at the company early on. This is *obviously* a very different ballgame than the Crown Affair example, but it shows the mindset of a strong and responsible leader and how they hire around their weaknesses, which I guess Matilda did not do.
I want all young women to be happier, cuter, and look nicer in a world that says they're not good enough!!! And I agree that the fault should rest more with the deceiver - not the deceived. As a marketer, I have the inside baseball, so this shit is obvious to me. But I'm not a vulnerable 16 year old girl. And I forgot that.
Ty for reading and engaging and your thoughtful approach to your reply, and always love to hear that anything I create is well-written.
Hot and refreshing take. The person became the brand, the brand became the person. It’s really no different than buying a ticket to a movie because your favorite actor is in it. This is about believing that if you better yourself, a perfect life is just around the corner. The charismatic pitch draws you in. The constant confirmation that it is literally just around the corner makes you stay. If I give my money to someone good, am I also good??
"It’s really no different than buying a ticket to a movie because your favorite actor is in it." DAMN. Had never made that jump, but I honestly love it. Thank you for taking it there. Just gave me a lot to think about. It's really this notion of separating the maker from the product. I think we see it a LOT in music and entertainment, like wtf do we do about loving or playing Michael Jackson's music now that.. you know.... but it doesn't get framed like this as much in entrepreneurship.
Welcome to the ADHD brain 😂 you caught my intent completely . Would I still listen to the song or see the movie even if the image I have in my head of this other person is shattered? Would I see the movie, even if it wasn’t that good because I just love the actor. I don’t think there is a right answer to the first question. Does the art stand alone or can only be enjoyed if the creator was a good person, I’d have to assume there are many more songs and movies and products we would then no longer consume if we really knew.
This defines my anxiety of simply existing as a founder, and before that an employee with a public Instagram. I often wonder if because I don’t share certain things about my life—the ones which make me seem vulnerable or imperfect or “relatable”—I’m hurting my likability. I also don’t share my highest “highlights” because I know I would need to temper them with the “lowlights” to not come off as gloating. But I don’t want to exploit my personal life or mental health to boost engagement, even though it seems like the most impactful way to build a cult as a public figure. This is having me a rash.
it’s quite the catch 22. i think the answer here lies in what your (the big Your not Annie’s “your”) ultimate goals are as a person and business owner. it seems like these days, if you want to make a ton of money, you have to either say “screw likability” and deprioritize that totally, going ham with your highs and owning that ur *that* girl (which annie, u r). i feel like the sporty and rich founder does this, Kayali fragrance founder mona kattan, too. her IG is a trip. and do this knowing it’ll turn people off, but you’ll make money. or you do the likability thing like most founders do and share the highs and lows, exploiting your personal life as you say - but it seems that won’t be an authentic approach. so why do it if it doesn’t feel right? i do think there are plenty of brands now that are not very founder forward that do a beautiful job, have great distribution and have been growing: Eadem is one i love. i think Topicals is an example of a brand with a strong founder who does not do the highs lows thing, actually, and i for one am endlessly rooting for her + the team and never see it as gloating! but yes rashes abound. tho i for one am excited for whatever ur launching in 2025, and whatever strategy you go with, i’m buying 💸
Thank you Ali <3
Oh I feel this so deeply. I think this post answers your question exactly - what are you trying to accomplish? Monetizing your followers and want to optimize this to its fullest - be as likable as possible. Want to connect and build community - be as real as possible.
Want both - be as real as possible and be happy with a smaller slice of the total pie.
Man this is so good. When you think about it, we’re all content creators - some to a greater degree/following than others - and everything we project online is a persona. It’s crazy how easily people cling on to personas and how much it influences them. It doesn’t really matter who a person truly is, but rather what they’re selling. And even if the individual betrays the viewers’ perceptions of what they’re selling, rarely do they suffer large consequences - the aesthetic and image must live on.
I don’t understand the Lexapro Lip Liner Rare Beauty joke. Can you explain that one to me? Haha
omg yes happy to! Rare Beauty uses a lot of empowering schticky names for their products like “always an optimist soft radiance powder” and “stay vulnerable” liquid eyeshadow so it was a light poke at that :)
Ahhh!!! Makes sense and you are so right! I personally love the brand but the names are very cringe 🤣🤣🤣 Thank you!
This is full Kara Swisher mode and I love it
you don’t know how much that means to me.
🫖🫖🫖🫖🫖
tea indeed!
Loveeeeees this take.
thank u Paloma! appreciate you reading 🖤🙏
10000% co-sign all of this
i loved writing this
💅
💅💅💅
legit
👩🍳