This sucks. I'm sorry you were misrepresented in the media. I've been reading your blog for long enough to know that you aren't in it for the free swag and I do find it terrible that someone would misrepresent you just for an article.
Write a letter to the editor. It is one of the most-read sections of the NYT. You write well, make your point clearly, and your letter is important to let readers of the Times know you felt you were misrepresented.
I'm sorry to hear about this. That really sucks that the paper would do that to you. I've been reading your blog for a long time and I appreciate your honesty. I've never felt that you favor certain products or do anything wrong! I love your site and others, and instead of relying on magazines, I look to blogs for honest reviews. Especially since it's known that magazines sometimes only favorably review products that advertisers pay them to advertise and give a review on. Anyways, don't let this get you down and I'm hope you get some of the story retracted!
I didn't like the overall tone of the article at all. The author seemed bitter and jealous.
In fairness I do think that you should disclose when you are gifted an item or sample to review. I read a few other review websites (not makeup however) and they disclose if they bought the item and how much they paid for the item or if it was a gift.
I'm with you on mostly reviewing item that you like, I've tried a few things lately that were horrible (trish mcevoy luminizing eye base for one) but I'd rather blog about Urban Decay primer potion that is a thousand times better.
SO glad you wrote this hun! The whole time I was reading this article, i was having serious trouble believing all that I was reading. Especially when she quoted you. After that Allure magazine article, it seemed a little hard to believe. I adore your blog, and look forward to hopefully another 3 years of reading!
What difference does it make if you get the item free or not! That's just good PR work by the companies. The object of this game is to critique a product HONESTLY so readers get a better idea of the product than represented by an advertisement. This is what I think Kristen does and does very well.
Clearly the article was written by someone who has absolutely no concept of the true interest we "addicts" have in our products, let alone wanting to express it in a venue such as a blog. Secondly, since we seem to be giving Ms. Schaefer and other "jounalists" a run for their money in reporting on the beauty world, she came across as having an axe to grind. Thirdly, NO ONE who is as devoted to these blogs, reviews and beauty-lovin' as we are is going to buy this garbage she's dishing out about "just wanting the freebies" for even a second. Ms. Schaefer, you're barking up the wrong tree, dear!
I totally run into the same problem - I write a theater blog, and arts companies have started to comp me as well to their shows. I also struggle with revealing if it was a "blogger's night" or not, also because I fear it will take away from the validity of my review, because my thoughts on a show has always been honest. The point of my blog is to foster discussion and get people excited about theater, and to write about the arts in a positive way, even despite minor criticisms. I do this for both shows that I've been comped (which is a very small percentage of shows I go to), as well as the ones that I've paid full price for.
This isn't a beauty blog-specific thing, it's permeating through every field and topic. And we can deal with it tastefully and with maturity, as you have.
The article is disappointing, but if it helps, you look fab. 
I noticed the reference to the NYT article on another beauty blog, then again here. I'm purposely not clicking through to read the article; it's pretty clear there's not much point and I don't want to give the NYT the validation. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that mainstream media is totally freaked out by the blog world -- they can't control it and they don't understand it. So it's pretty easy for them to print erroneous information.
Beauty Addict is one of the very first blogs I started reading on a regular basis. In some ways, it opened me up to the world of blogs in general. So sorry you had this experience - but your readers love you!
Bonjour! When I first read the article, I thought, huh, pretty good. But after reading a few of the responses from the blogs involved, I re-read it again and realized how ill-informed and insulting it actually was.
Someone made the very good point on another blog that theater, film, and book critics are never excoriated for receiving tons of free merchandise, which they obviously do. Sportswriters get free passes to just about any game they want. Fashion editors get truckloads of swag. It's all in the open (who hasn't at least heard of The Devil Wears Prada?), but for some reason bloggers are held to a different standard. If Roger Ebert had to pay for every single DVD or film he reviewed, he wouldn't be able to make a living out of it.
I love most beauty blogs and am smart enough (as are most of their readers) to recognize when a site is just an echo of a company's press release. I think that if you write honest, well-written reviews, the reader won't care if you got the stuff for free or not. And I don't think we necessarily should write full disclosures all over our site -- no book reviewer writes, "Full Disclosure: Random House sent me a free copy of this book," after every review. It looks clunky and is entirely unnecessary, IMHO.
Anyhoo, congratulations on the mention anyway. As Nadine said in her blog, at the very least, it does at least recognize that beauty blogs are becoming a force to be reckoned with. And personally, I'm happy that it introduced me to some awesome sites like yours.
Salut,
Marjorie
Thanks for the very good response to the Time's unfortunately inaccurate article. I think I have seen nearly everyone interviewed stating on one blog or another that they felt the author practiced biased reporting and selective editing. Overall it seems that the author was more interested in stirring up controversy than in engaging in accurate reporting. I am saddened to see such a thing from a paper of the caliber of the Times.
With all due respect, why not say which products you review are freebies?
I read your blog and I read the article, but I did not find it entirely negative, and I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. Your readers know who you are, and I'm sure it peaked the interest of other who will visit your blog as a result. After all, I first visited your blog after reading about you in the NYT last year!
Obviously this person writing this article, and calling her self a journalist have no clue what is going on in today's world. I subscribe to every beauty and fashion magazine I read at least 12 different magazines a month, and guess what I have NOT PURCHASED not even one beauty product because of reviews in the magazines. Every thing I purchase I buy is based on what I have read on your site, or other beauty blogs. she is writing an article, gets paid and is expected to write a certain type of article. you are not, the reviews you post is based on your own opinions, which I am expecting when I log on everyday. That's is also what the other readers are expecting. about u receiving free samples? duh what do they expect!! you to buy every single product some of which you would not have purchased on your own, or maybe not interested about. the companies should be thankful, all they give you are samples, and they get direct response instantly. That's is very cheap compare to the millions they spend on advertising that goes to no use. Not because everyone do not leave a comment means they do not go out and purchase the product. Like me I do purchase the product, and do not leave a comment and also tell everyone about the products even if I don't like it, maybe someone else I know would like it. Since I have been on beauty sites like your and others I have been purchasing more beauty products more often that I use to. I appreciate your opinion, it is very helpful, and honest and puts me ahead when I go to the store. So when the associate tries to sell me products or try to mislead and push me into buying something I already know the real deal.
Do not worry about that article and just continue to do what you have been doing.
Kristen,
I'm delurking to say I love your blog. I think it's fun and irreverant and I think your reviews of many of the products are spot-on.
I read about ten good beauty blogs, checking them at night when I get home and want to think about something other than work. Some mention when the products are freebies, some don't. I just assumed the companies sent them to you so they'd get written about. I think your writing is a lot more objective - and in touch with real women - than almost any beauty or fashion magazine. I am tired of the same-old, same-old from the magazines. That is why I enjoy the freshness of your reviews and your writing about your life.
I read the NYT article after I read your blog tonight. I came away feeling the reporter had an agenda - and she heard exactly what she wanted to hear and little else. Then she just pigeon-holed whatever you said to make it fit the direction in which she was going.
I hope you're not discouraged. I like what you're doing - and I will continue to look forward to hearing from the beauty addict when I get home from work at night.
Wow. Personally, I believe that article was not only off-base, but rude and insensitive as well. Unfortunately, the Times doesn't allow comments - I'm sure it would be a storm! I'm very glad that you wrote this response (which I'm going to link to, if that's alright with you?), especially as your blog is one of the most respected in the beauty network, if I may say so.
Continue as you have been - the blog is fantastic, and she was completely out of line!
When I started my blog, I had no idea companies would want to send me free products! It never dawned on me, and I hadn't really seen any beauty blogs til after I made the blog. Since I'm really picky (especially about skin care products) I rarely accept free products, unless I can give them away, or unless I think I will like the product. I always want to try new products to write about, but then I end up not liking a lot of stuff, so it makes it difficult.
WE ALL GOT YOUR BACK, GIRL!
lol.
P.S. I don't see why whether or not it's relevant that you get some products for free vs. you purchasing them. The reviews of your product are great & informative, that's all that matters!
to quote Mariah: "them chickens is ash and you're lotion! i ain't gonna let nobody's drama bother me!"
De-lurking to say please try not to let the article bother you too much, Kristen. That NYT writer clearly had no interest in writing a truthful article about beauty blogging.
The writer clearly isn't familiar with concepts like subtly and tact and that it is possible to have an honest review site without excoriating products left and right. Even if you never give another poor opinion of a product again (which I don't expect you to do), the fact that you called out the mediocrity of Great Lash and the like makes your blog more honest than EVERY BEAUTY MAG ON THE MARKET.
I second Beth's suggestion of writing a letter to the editor.
Kristen~ You handle reviewing the products with grace and style. It's a shame other's can't see that. Media stories can be twisted in order to get more attention and to be a bigger seller. And there was nothing wrong with you having your eyes done by Burton with the blueberry artliner by Lancome and showing the champagne flute. That's one of the great pics. (How childish can a writer get?)
Kristen,
I am so glad you are taking this public stand. I was thinking of emailing you to ask you about your personal reaction to this article in the NYT, which I immediately felt strongly about and wrote to someone that I felt it was "borderline insulting" to the beauty bloggers. Obviously, as one of the interviewees, you had more information with which to assess the situation. Thank you for clarifying the fact that you do blog about products that you do not like, that is an important point to make known.
This NYT editorial felt completely political and selective to the point of caricature. The New York Times should be ashamed of printing such shallow, politically-motivated pieces of "journalism" or shall we say rather propaganda. Did this pseudo journalist mention the fact that the NYT is blogging about beauty now too?
The only fundamental and interesting thing one retains from this article is that the traditional print media are worried that the new media are picking up. There was also an article a few days ago in WWD that wanted to convince their readers that bloggers were air-heads although right now I am biting my tongue not to say something nasty about the contents of one of the magazine cited.
That NYT article pretended slyly in appearance to offer publicity to a sister media, the beauty blogosphere, but the subtext all along was about its disciplined public bashing hopping to cast doubts in the minds of, yes this is paradoxical, non-informed NYT readers (they should stay that way).
The bloggers were depicted generally in demeaning terms, in particular as - subtext -"sample whores" (no real comparison was made with similar protocoles in the beauty print media). That pseudo journalist never wondered whether if one were to report favorably on lousy products, then the readership might pick on it and perhaps...flee? And then one might not get free samples anymore. The story about bloggers setting up blogs on purpose to get samples was the last straw. It may happen in some cases, but to conclude the story on it was really sly.
Whoever that brave young woman is (she comes across as youngish or immature?), one can only applaud her high level of indoctrination and wonder how much she gets paid to write such an article.
Also, it is simply not ethical to distort quotes from interviewees. I have been approached by some journalists in the past that seemed not to be content lest I could drool profusely all over perfume and say that I was experiencing severe withdrawal symptoms if I was not wearing a fume. The kind of thing that makes a good story, apparently.
Sorry this happened.
Hi,
I am the author of a blog beauty written into The French language (I am a French woman) you can read it ...
I think that beauty bloggers are not obsessed by free products, for example I buy the majority of the products...only some brands send me products. I always mentionnend to the brand I am free to write what I want and I let also the people writting what they want on comment.
I am sorry for my English writting...
I started my own beauty blog a few months ago (it's in Portuguese... but you can still look at the pictures And I know for fact that no one is ever going to send me free stuff. So what if they do? Like someone mentioned before, critics in other areas get free stuf: movie and theather critics go to free openins, restaurant critics get free food... nobody ever questions them. I will continue to read beauty blogs for a non biased insight into the industry and products. You have already saved me some money by reviewing «lemons». The beauty blogs and forums are a valuable consumer resource for all of us. And above all, remember: makeup is supposed to be fun
Hi,
I have just written a post on my beauty blog about this article.
et que les blogs beauté poursuivent leur joli chemin ! na !
The NYT article's journalism was certainly not balanced and perhaps not worthy of that publication. Having said that, there were some spin-offs that I see as very positive,
1. it's given you a chance to clear the air and have your readers understand you better, so your credibility is enhanced ; people wonder about how reviewers get the product since they obviously can't buy them all
2. it will increase your readership many times over with the exposure; I write for women over 35, many of whom may not be as internet-savvy as your readers and would not be aware beauty blogs exist - so we all thank you for putting up with this.
3. you'll have good article topics for weeks to come
4. new communication channels will open with women and other bloggers - because blogging really is one huge conversation.
5.I'm interested in how you handle products you don't like. You can't only always say good things if you're going to cover the topic fairly and there's a lot of expensive product out there that does not perform. I agree with jolieinnyc's decision to stop accepting gifts.It doesn't look good and would be perceived as skewing your opinion in any other industry.
So, hey, take the bad with the good. Any blogger would still trade places with you.
I'm glad to have found your blog.
Kristen, don't even let this article worry you - your readers know the truth, and you have nothing to prove to us. Anyone who would blindly believe a word of that terrible excuse for journalism without at least checking in here to see your response isn't someone whose opinion is worth considering. Good for you for sticking up for yourself and your fellow bloggers, girl, and keep on keepin' on! You're the best!
I really wouldn't worry too much about it. I read the article and it sounds like the writer is quite jealous. In all the article sounded petty and bitchy, and a bit like an envious teenager. I can't believe they published something so obviously biased.
Go 'head Kristen! I completely agree with your response to that incredibly slanted article. Your reviews are real and honest, and that's why you are one of my beauty blog inspirations. Keep your head up and don't let that article break your stride. Go on out there and rock Fashion Week for those of us who can't be in NYC!
what i particularly like about you and your blog is that even if you don't like one product from a line, you don't dismiss the line entirely. you even point out the products you think are fabulous! i don't think you're a swag whore at all and if you didn't get freebies once in a while, i don't know how you could afford to live in the nyc area with all your beauty goodies!
These kind of accusations run across the board in any industry that reviews products.
Too bad she couldn't be as kind as you in her writing. But I guess that wouldn't sell!
Keep up your good work!
I haven't read the article yet, but nothing you've written here surprises me one bit. (Hello, August 2006 Allure magazine, anyone? A.k.a., the reason I have a disclaimer in my sidebar?)
And I have to say (again, not having read the article), I don't understand why on earth beauty bloggers would be singled out for this sort of vilification. Hello, do you think the beauty MAGAZINES are paying for their products? Hell no! Are music reviewers only writing about CDs they've actually purchased? Hell no! Book reviewers? Are they paying for those books? HELL NO. How is this any different?
Anyway, I'm sorry this happened to you (again!), K. Keep on doing what you do!
I love your blog, and it makes me upset to think that this whole article upset you. Like one commenter, ALL of the products that I buy now are usually because of a good review on your blog, or others like makeupbag.com. HELLO URBAN DECAY PRIMER POTION!!!!
In fact, the other night I cut mine in 1/2 and scooped out the remaining (HUGE AMOUNT) of product because of the tip on YOUR blog.
There is nothing wrong with getting free products, I would be on the streets if I had to pay for all the ones you review.
Kristen -
I do think the point that has been made re: mainstream journalism feeling threatened by the blogosphere is very on-point here. The "profession" must feel at risk of losing its status and readership if it feels it must discredit bloggers and paint you as amateurs. There's no need for the NYT to take the "Us v. them" attitude. Don't they see that bloggers are a good journalist's best friends? I learned about Mr. Chandler Burr from your blog and others, and now religiously seek out his stories. I would tend to lay blame here at the door of the NYT Style editor who allowed this story angle in the first place, and suggest their fact-checker head over to the New Yorker for a crash course in how to do the job properly.
I personally don't care one whit whether you are reviewing free samples from companies or spending your own hard-earned cash at Sephora. Considering the money you have saved me in steering me clear of products that don't live up to the hype, I'm delighted that you benefit even in such a small way from your blog. You so obviously do this for love, not money.
I'm glad you're resolved to not worry too much about it. It wasn't the first besmirching of your intentions, and it won't be the last. As Mr. Capote said, "The dogs bark, but the caravan marches on..." Let the dogs bark; your caravan is running smoothly and beautifully forward.
Kristen,
I love your blog. I think it is great that you are diplomatic and even-handed when posting a negative opinion of a product. You have made it very clear that when a product makes you break out it doesn't mean that it will make everyone break out.
I find your blog dipolmatic, and very informative. We all know the news loves to sensationalize most things, and this was no exception. All of us here laud your knack for tactfully writing reviews, in a way that is fair and in a way that doesn't drive us away in annoyance by super-bashing a company for one bad product.
You've done our grunt work in finding great products. Kick the NYTs to the curb.
Keep up the good work.
You go girl! Looks like you already have a lot of support- but just wanted to delurk and chime in.
We still love you!
im sorry but i find all of this a bit amusing. I read tia's blog and that lead me to the article which lead me to more blogs. It seems that every blog had a rebuttal to what was written and rightly so but i think the serious tone of the article and the objections to it are a bit much. In one woman's response she writes about the difficulty of testing all the products or something like that. At the end of the day this is about makeup products, who cares who gets what for free. No one is curing AIDS or helping starving children. Why all the drama? I just dont get it but maybe its just me
im sorry but i find all of this a bit funny. I read tia's blog and that lead me to the other article which lead me to more blogs. It seems that every blog had a rebuttal to what was written and rightly so but i think the serious tone of the article and the objections to it are a bit much. In one woman's response she writes about the difficulty of testing all the products or something like that. At the end of the day this is about makeup products, who cares who gets what for free. No one is curing AIDS or helping starving children. Why all the drama? I just dont get it but maybe its just me
It sucks to be mis-quoted. It's happened to me when I've tried to promote my Web site, and I quickly learned to decline any other requests for interviews from writers I hadn't heard of/read, even if they were from a well-known paper/magazine.
Don't change what you are doing as a result of this article or any comments here. If you noted every freebie, you'd be accused of bragging. And if you don't mention it, you'll be accused of being a sample whore. Write what you feel and don't put any conditions one it either way. Sometimes it is approrpriate to note when a company goes all out with their press kits, and other times, it makes no difference. I trust your judgement on that.
I think stuff like this just goes to show how there's this sort of intellectual gap between people-who-blog-or-read-blogs and people-who-don't. I follow a lot of blogs on a daily basis, and I've always assumed that bloggers do what they do because they enjoy it, not because they get free stuff. That said, I'm sure there's a small faction of bloggers who promote the stuff they get for free and only the stuff they get for free... but how is that at all different from what you read in magazines? Who among us hasn't noticed that the products that beauty editors for magazines tend to feature also tend to be heavily advertised in the magazine? That's not a coincidence, and we're all aware of it (those of us who are paying attention, at least). All of that being said... I don't particularly care whether a positive review comes from a genuine place or not, haha! The reason for that is because I don't let any one person's opinions sway me... not because their opinions may not be genuine, but because something that works for me isn't necessarily going to work for you and vice versa. When it comes to making the decision to actually purchase a beauty product, I always, without fail, consult a site such as makeupalley first, because the sheer volume of reviews on that site gives me a better idea of how a product performs. Usually my decision to follow a beauty blog actually comes less from the reviews itself, and more from the writing style... is it an enjoyable read, can I relate in some way to the content, that sort of thing. As for mainstream media... I'm coming to realize more and more these days that news outlets have their own agendas. Due to a recent incident with a local columnist, I no longer have any faith in my daily newspaper (which I used to read every morning) and have ceased reading it. I think the lesson we can all take away is to always think critically about EVERYTHING we read. Just because it's printed in a major news publication doesn't mean it's any more trustworthy than what you read on a blog... in fact, it may be less so! Just had to get that all off my chest... don't let any of this get you down, you're doing a great job!
The way I see it is if NYTimes never wrote that article I would have never found your blog. I never knew there were so many beauty blogs out there, I generally get my information from magazines like Allure but you have a refreshing, objective voice. I spent some time going through your archives and I really like what I read. So if we look on the bright side, NYTimes brought you at least one more reader. Take care
being a beauty blogger, I could tell how exagerated the piece was as soon as I got to the third paragraph!
Wow, now I know how some celebrities feel when they are honestly misquoted and misrepresented.
~Cybele
When I think why I trust blog reviews more so than a magazine articles, its mainly because the blogger him/herself had a need for a particular product, did some research, and invested some time in trying it out. When you accept "free" samples and products, which we all invariably do we just don
’t all write blogs about it, you have to admit that you lose a bit of your own objectivity as a reviewer.
For one, you didn
’t seek out the product, the product found you. The glut of products advertised in magazines and in ads try to convince us that more is better, which is a costly message for the consumer. The reason I look to blogs is to cut down the slew of products to find the nitty gritty, products that are a. worth my money b. are effective and c. serve dual purposes (do I really need separate eye creams/night creams? etc).
I was a bit na
ïve in that I didn’t realize bloggers were getting so many samples- and I'll admit that it does make me think twice about the fact that I'm using the blogs essentially as buying guides (hence the reason companies are taking an interest). I guess nothing beats your own trial and error as far as products are concerned.
Elsie - well said.
While I love the beauty blogs (and this one in particular!) I just didnt realize that so many free products were given out...it would never even have occurred to me to ask such a question in the comments. Naive but true.
Now, in retrsopect, as I read the less than glowing reviews referenced, I realize how couched they were in very glowing language about other products from the line...which did influence me.
I have really put a lot of faith in the opinions of beauty bloggers and was very naive.
I still love this site and will still read it...but I will not necessarily give the reviews the same amount of weight in my purchasing decisions.
Sorry. It is not my intent to be negative, but to be honest, I feel a bit duped. Maybe most people understood the system. I didnt.
I read your blog everyday - it's one of my favorite "beauty stops" on the web and I can tell that you are a true beauty junkie who is not just out for swag!
Also, I had assumed all along that you and other prominent beauty bloggers got free products, so that aspect of the NYT article was no great surprise to me. That being said, if I had to rank the following sources in terms of how objective I *personally* thinkg they are, it would be:
1. Reviews written by people who do not have any type of relationship with the beauty companies (e.g., makeupalley reviews and beautybuzz messageboard).
2. Blogs
3. Magazines
For me, negative product reviews are just as fun to read and helpful as positive reviews, especially when I am trying to make a purchase decision. So, it's not actually that helpful when a blogger just "leaves out" something they are not so enthused about.
As I said, your blog is one of my daily reads, but for me it is more of a source for up-to-minute beauty news than a source for "objective" product reviews.
P.S. By the way, RE: other comments it is not true that everyone who does product reviews gets stuff for free. For example, Consumer Reports does not accept free test samples. Of course, they can afford to purchase everything they test because of the $ they make off of subscriptions, etc.
I'd like to weigh in as a grad student doing magazine and online journalism at Syracuse University's Newhouse School of Public Communication (kind of a big deal, the program is ranked like 3rd in the nation for journalism and the Newhouse family owns Conde Nast and a slew of other media). This is really sort of disturbing.
Part of the reason I read your blog is because you keep it all about the love of the products but you feel free to call out products that have a hype issue (hello, O-Glow!). You say it well, we're here to celebrate beauty products, not rag on them for not working with our personal chemistry.
The way the Times journalist implied things out of context seriously violates the code of journalistic ethics, I do hope you write to the Times- they need to know your side of this. I'm truly sorry that this happened to you, it's the kind of thing that ruins the reputation of journalists and it honestly makes me sad. Just know that there are a lot of us out here, especially those of us at Newhouse, who take fair and ethical reporting very seriously.
I also wanted to add that while the paradigm change from print to online journalism is scary for more than a few people in the industry, especially newspaper people, from what I've seen the vast majority of people are really excited about it. The work that Mediastorm does, for example, really highlights the possibilities for how journalists can tell stories with the range of technology the web provides. And while there are definitely concerns regarding fabrication for news blogs that aren't affiliated with a publication, my friends can testify about how amazing it was to blog for local NY newspapers at the New Hampshire primary. I mean yes, there are some issues that need to get worked out re: blogging and citizen journalism, but the blogging community shouldn't feel like the print media is bringing down some hate.
Again, I'm really sorry this happened to you, it shouldn't have.
And p.s. you know your booty is pretty much covered when it comes to fair criticism of beauty products under first amendment law, yes? Under the precedent set by Carr v. Hood (I think).
That article made me so angry! Coming on the heels of beauty editors moaning about beauty bloggers and their lack of "credentials", it's so obviously an industry insider piece (or at least a piece initiated by those people) attempting to discredit people like you who are giving honest opinions NOT purchased by ad space.
No one with a brain believes the cr@p sold to us by magazines anymore. And the industry feels threatened by that. So they try to buy off those they can, and smear the rest. I didn't give that article any more weight than lining my cockatiel's cage deserves. Dolly knows exactly how to deal with garbage like this!
I don't think you should feel obligated to tell us if the item you're reviewing was free or not. I think you're very fair in your reviews of products you don't like. You always tell us specifically what you didn't like and remind us that the product may work differently on othr people. It's unfortunate that she did such butcher-y to you and your blog. I think it's great. I could never afford most of the things you talk about but it's so much fun to read about all the newest items on the market and what you think about them.
Thanks Kristen!
Hi Kristen. I wanted to state that I believe what you are saying. I am a co-worker of blogdorf, and remember when she started her blog. She had encouraged me to start one also, but I did not have the time with a new hubby and baby. I know we did not realize about products or trips back then. I also know she tries and tests products constantly, and often gets some input from an office that consist of a wide variety of females and a few males. I am disappointed that NY times felt the need to sensationalize.
Kristen,
Love Beauty Addict...you are the only blog I read. The NYT article was a disgrace. Bitter jealous reporter, definitely did make all of you sound like "swag whores" in it for product and freebies...
We know you better!!! A tough, ugly lesson about the press, I am sure.
Best and keep doing it your way!
Debbi
I wanted to respond to a particular point that was made above regarding the ranking of beauty news source in terms of presumed objectivity. I can empathize to some extent with this view, but I wanted to point out that many journalists and bloggers frequent forums, so therefore it is not like forum members are more pure than others. There are forum politics too. Some of their members prefer to support certain bloggers or businesses etc.
Also some editors are bloggers.
Let's not fall into the trap of accepting the dividing line that the NYT presented as existing between the blogosphere and the press in print. Print journalists read the blogs and vice versa. Bloggers have great flexibility in their media, so this might make some journalists (who by the way could start their blogs) a bit sore.
Thanks to the person who reminded everyone of the protection offered by the first amendment. It's as simple as that.
A fair and articulate response, Kristen! The journalist displayed less credibility and professionalism than most of us 'amateurish, swag-grabbing' bloggers 
Kristen, You do a great job. I haven't read the NYT article and have no interest in doing so. I don't care what kind of samples you receive for free. I do care about your opinion, based on your expertise. The ability to comment is an added bonus. I think that you have been more than fair with your reviews and your commenters. That's why I am a regular reader of your blog.
I read many political blogs as well as beauty blogs, and the attitude of the mainstream media toward bloggers is overwhelmingly negative. The same so-called professional journalists who question bloggers' ethics have their own ethical problems. They have a large ax to grind as well. Readership of newspapers has dropped dramatically in recent years. Print journalists blame the bloggers, when they should blame sloppy and biased reporting in their own publications as a major reason for their dropping revenues.
Sorry this happened to you. They're threatened. That's all there is to it. When Makeupalley became popular, the press tried to discredit that site, too. There were tons of "ZOMG!!! They're swapping makeup! SO GROSS!" stories published. Even the Early Show did a segment on it. Don't feel bad. The attempt to discredit you means you're doing something right.
Thanks for this post. To be totally honest I used to routinely read this blog but then I noticed you do not disclose whether something has been given to you for free and often don't have negative reviews. In the past I had dismissed the blog (and many many others, this isn't a personal attack) as biased. Today, I came back here because of the NYT article. I spend a lot of money on beauty products and as an attorney I don't have much time to pop into Sephora and try items myself. T/f I heavily rely on beauty blogs for advice/recommendations and order online.
You're right, this is your blog and people like me don't have to read it if we don't like it. But disclosing whether something is free might actually vastly enlarge your reader-base, especially among those who read with a more critical eye, which would be beneficial to you in the long run.
Just my two cents, feel free to ignore. Take care.
Here's the thing. The NYT writer DID talk about the changing relationship between bloggers and cosmetic companies, and bloggers' growing influence. So when you dismiss her as having misled you that the article was to be about that, I think you're off the mark. The problem seems to be more that she didn't write a complimentary article. Also, surely you must realize that journalist doesn't know exactly what an article will say until she writes it. Interviewing beauty bloggers was part of her reporting process. Perhaps the level of swag involved was surprising to her (I know it was to me, and I read beauty blogs all the time), and that seemed to her the more compelling angle. Just as it is your choice to write whatever you want on your blog, it is HER choice to decide the emphasis of her story. This entire episode has been a real eye opener to me. Maybe I'm naive. But suddenly all the beauty blogs I've been reading seem kind of ugly to me. I'm cleaning out a few old bookmarks tonight. As the poster before me, "C", says: Take care.
i found you because of the New York Times article. I bet your traffic is through the roof now. I'd be grateful to the New York Times.
This is so disappointing for you, I'm sure. But if it's any consolation I came to visit your site (I had forgotten about it) after reading about the article and not because I believed what was written. The upside to this is that you've been introduced to many new readers.
I didn't think the article was biased at all. The parts that angered you were mostly quotes from marketing people, so maybe you should take it up with them. And whether you were taken out of context is up for debate - I didn't read it that way at all.
It sounds like part of the problem is that most journalists adhere to codes of ethics but not all bloggers do. You don't seem to think that's necessary - fair enough, it's your blog. But an easy way to clear that up is a post like the one you just wrote, where you lay out whether you accept free gifts, how we can find out if we're curious, and the fact that you focus on products you love rather than products that you hate.
I personally would like to see more reviews of products you tried and hated, and as a daily reader I would appreciate it if you mentioned in your posts whether what you tested was a free gift.
All that said, I really love your blog and I have seen lots of negative product reviews here. As a reader, I don't think you're biased. As a journalist, I hope you'll be more upfront about these things in future.
Hey Girl! It was great to see you the other night!! Look at all this support for you! I understand your need to set the record straight but look at all these comments...it is obvious that your writing stands for itself. Let me know if you need anything because you know I love ya! You are one of the first blogs i ever read and you continue to inspire me on a daily basis. Keep up the great work love....xoxo
Hi,
Here is a link to EFF, a legal association that protects bloggers' rights and clarifies the so-called distinctions between bloggers and journalists.
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/
Hey Kristen, great to see you last week! Pictures from Koi are on my blog now.
I'm surprised by some of these comments--people acting all duped and jaded because we get products submitted to us from companies thus assuming we are biased? Please. We answer to no one but our readers, I'm not sure how it would benefit us to write glowing posts on each product and not be honest. Don't they know that what they see on Today and GMA and virtually any show dishing on the best beauty and fashion are also free products submitted? The magazines are the same way--all magazines, not just Allure and Vogue, but any magazine you see on the stands. And what you see in newspapers...I mean I could really go on and on.
I'm sure readers who have been with us from the beginning will know and understand the truth we speak when we review, but those new to us might not and could assume generically we are all the same.
Oh well.
I must say I find this whole thing relatively disturbing. The idea that simply receiving free things offends someone's ability to be objective, especially someone who does not depend on industry backing to survive is ludicrous. I receive things in the mail all the time, little lotion samples and shampoo packets, but I don't feel obligated to like them. If my friends ask for my opinion, I tell them I liked it or I didn't. No big deal. The only difference with bloggers is that they share their opinion with more people than me.
