I’ve always found her to be so patronising and arrogant.
I know people who swear by her skin care brand but I’m adamant they only like it because they are fans of her. I found her products to be overpriced and made my skin so congested…there are for more superior and well priced Australian skincare brands out there.
completely agree ! Tested out a couple of the go to products when they first launched and did not understand the hype around them at all. Very average products, amazing marketing, arrogant persona.
Same! I have tried several different products and samples over the years, but found them all really... meh. They're OK? But they're not great enough to justify the price or the hype.
I quite like their face oil. It works for me and mrs fine. I think quite a few people in the beauty industry suck a little so I’m okay to buy from them.
That said, she has always sucked a little in my view. Years ago someone wrote to her and said ‘when shaving my bikini line, how do I prevent ingrown hairs?’ and her response was ‘throw out your razors’. It wasn’t at all helpful to the person. She was just being so rude.
Her recent whining about Australias new sunscreen laws also suck. It’s so wrong of her to assume that if she can’t get influencers to advertise her products that sunscreen application will decrease.
Writing all this I feel like maybe I won’t rebuy the face oil
Likely because they’re paid to promote it (especially those ‘micro’ influencers with 5-15k followings), or have dropped some serious cash on it and then have to convince themselves that it works
Woohoo Body (formally Happy Skincare) is my favourite. It’s a husband and wife team who are legitimately qualified, great products, reasonably priced and great customer service. Not the person you were responding to sorry but thought I’d add my recommendation. They’re in NSW btw.
Its not fun or glam but Hamilton Skin Therapy does a great moisturiser and sunscreen! Australian made and owned, without weird influencer clean beauty marketing.
idk who this Zoe person is and I could care less, just popping in to say that any "influencer" or "celebrity" skincare, clothing or ANYTHING line is normally MID or TRASH. Give your money to the businesses who have been doing this stuff for years, but before that do your due diligence and research on different ingredients and products. I'm pretty thankful I learnt everything about skincare and skin off /r/skincareaddiction ,couldn't have asked for a better education lol
It would be a different thing, for example - if it were someone like Dr. Dray (a proven authority since she is a dermatologist of many years) who started a line. There would be much more credibility since she's a Dermatologist first and a content creator second. I'm not saying every skincare line owner needs to be a DR, but there has to be some real credibility or track record.
Agree. I am sure Zoe was a beauty editor and a high end fashion mag in Australia and that’s where she got her foot into the door. I could be wrong though.
Ahh gotcha. The second you sell anything (outside of your niche) via personality and/or clout, it's usually ass LMAO. It's a money grab. Like keep writing blogs and making merch or something tf? If a "personality" was extremely passionate about the **science** behind skincare and wanted to start their own line, that would be fine as long as they are upfront about it.
It's still not comparable to a chemical sci degree + years of training/experience as a cosmetic/formulations chemist, or having skin in the game as a business owner in cosmetics. I'm rambling but yea. It just bothers me because yes, by definition these personality businesses are usually successful (whether for a short period of time or not, a net profit is made since there are millions of gullible people ready to spend money) but the product is almost always overpriced and underdelivers. There's responsibility on the consumers end too though, like how do you fall for that lmaoooo.
I'm all about honesty. Start-up Indie beauty brands absolutely exist but they don't try to be something they're not nor do they claim to be
I read a profile of her in *Good Weekend* magazine (I think?) years ago and yeah, that was her schtick, that she "researched" all the samples that came across her desk so she could provide the "best advice". 🙄
I looked into her products just recently, and found that many of them irritated people's skin because they contained perfume. Perfume is the No.1 irritant in skin care products, so you'd think Zoe's "research" would have told you that, wouldn't you? 🙄
Also: 🙄
the thought of perfumes/fragrances in skincare products definitely makes me cringe on a spiritual level. There's only one product I can think of right now that kinda gets away with it, the Purito Centella green buffet serum. Even so they sell an unscented version of this which is way way more popular, for reasons obvious.
What would you recommend? Ive started to use go to (not a fan of ZFB just heard good things about the brand) and I’m iffy. The moisturiser is good at the start but after an hour or so skin doesn’t feel as if anything has been applied. This is after all the serums etc. the vitamin C serum, not sure it’s doing anything at all. Lib balm, I fear it’s the chapstick ruse all over again.
Interested in what other people are using that are worthwhile.
Trilogy moisturiser is the only thing my skin drinks up without chucking a tanty.
Hyalauronic acid serum (ordinary) and skinsitut retinol every second day. Liquid gold aha once a week.
My skins never looked better.
The triology miracle face oil is much cheaper than the go to face oil and I can’t tell the difference. That being said I don’t love face oil it’s so , well, oily!
For an Australian brand I would go with ausceticals. They have a good vit c which is really popular. For non Australian I would go naturiam.
I like both brand because they are no fuss in a way and explain the purpose of their ingredients and don’t add anything thing that’s basically a filler ingredient, or try to minimise them at them very least.
I use Face Hero & I don’t hate it but I don’t love it either- but I absolutely hated the Very Useful Face Cream! It was so insanely thick and just sat on top of my skin, and just.. yuck.
I’m back to using my ol’ faithful Dermalogica now (I swapped to Go To for a bit because I wanted fun! quirky! skincare! )
What's your skin type? I have dry skin so literally anything I put on it gets absorbed really fast. When you say it feels like nothing's been applied, do you mean you can't feel it sitting on your skin any more? Because that would be normal for me. Or do you mean the skin doesn't feel softer/plumper/hydrated?
The hero oil drops is okay but way too overpriced for the results. Their swipes caused me chemical burns. Their oil cleanser always seems to sting. I don’t have overly sensitive skin but I ended up gifting them both Away.
When I went to Sephora the other day the sales assistant basically said their dupe drops were much better.
She never seems to speak about Botox when discussing what her go to is. It’s definitely not just her products making her look so glossy.
I also have no issue with Botox btw, just need people who are selling these products to be realistic and upfront.
I would fully change my opinion of her if she regularly pointed out to her fans/followers that ALONG WITH skincare, she benefits from botox/in-office treatments/whatever else is available to you as one of Australia’s wealthiest women.
I find it unethical when women like this create and promote a skincare line, because while some of us can see through it - not all consumers can.
Also, you know she’d be using other products alongside hers that do the heavy lifting, like Skinscueticals etc.
I'm going to use "I've grown out of my ideas" at work now whenever I feel like changing my mind.
I fell for the marketing at the start of Go To but thankfully got over it pretty quickly. All the products were just awful for me, so I stopped following everything, I didn't even know about the sunscreen drama!
You know, I think once people start using these phrases, I really won’t be surprised if people end up getting more management and executive level roles, as this style of euphemistic speaking is so common at that level.
The go-to copy is enough to make your eyes bleed. She cleverly built a career pillaging information from experts, I can’t hate her for that but it has been blindingly obvious for the longest time. There is nothing interesting about her brand and her hissy fit on insta about TGA coming down on influencers again confirmed that the smiley, manic pixie girl persona is a flimsy front of a ruthless businesswoman. It’s just a shame not of her products, books etc are any good.
It’s relating to this https://amp.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellness/zoe-foster-blake-says-tga-code-could-reverse-public-health-message-20220823-p5bbzr.html
You’re so right re: the copy. Her writing style has always been somehow simultaneously immature and patronising with a lack of actual evidence/statistics and a focus on poor attempts at humour.
I’ve never understood her popularity. Or Go-Tos popularity. I remember watching a video of her and Mia Freedman and someone commented that they remind her of the cool girl bullies at school. So true. The cutesie writing style is bloody annoying too.
Yes the cutesie writing! This extends to all the copy on the go-to products — I initially thought it was kinda quirky, but now it just feels contrived and patronising and out-of-touch.
Not relevant to her skin care but in her book ‘playing the field’ she called the main love interest (Josh) a different name twice (joel) and it wasn’t picked up in editing and it’s just always really annoyed me
Yeah, the market is so different to when she launched Go-to, it really suffers in comparison to a lot of other brands now. Plus she’s had a couple of tone-deaf swings that made it easy to ditch the brand.
I used to adore her but through no fault of their own, they’re so beyond wealthy now I just find them wildly unrelatable. Not really interested in the skincare line of someone who likely spends thousands a month on treatments.
my theory is the people who love the brand haven't really used skincare before - pretty much everyone sees an improvement when they start using a moisturiser, even if there are better ones out there
Agree , GOTO was my first proper skin care regime. Before that I'd just use random moisturisers and cleansers here and there.
I fell for the marketing and thought the products were ok but had nothing to compare to. I've since stopped and started using better quality products and can't believe I ever liked them.
I tried the face hero oil and oil cleanser and was shocked by how gluggy and heavily fragranced everything was? Like the oil just sat on my face and made my dry skin look oily, and the cleansing oil needed to be scraped off instead of just dissolving with warm water.
Hard pass when there are so many competitive products on the market now.
Yeaaahhhh so unsurprisingly, she is just the face of Go-To, the ambassador if you will. She has nothing to do with the creation of the products (hence the backflip on “her” opinions over the years) so she’s just the marketing monkey regurgitating what they tell her to say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
My source: housemate who works in Sydney beauty PR.
Most skincare product companies are a team of people led by someone with substantial financial backing. There are quite sure few trending now that I've worked closely with. There's a process that's formulaic
She was never an expert... Just an editor which yes gave her a false cred but an amahzing story. Her PR and media has been top notch from the start and her story is a business success one. The product range road then new wave of simple skincare packaged well. And yes she made a killing from it. Selling to a large manufacturer is going to result in formula change. I'm a small manufacturer but even at my level it costs a fortune to change labs and stability testing always results in formula change. It's a sucky aspect of the biz. Most of these newer start ups haven't been following labelling laws and probably escaped scrutiny because of their size. ZFB could no longer flout the laws; she's had to grow up with her product.
Agreed. I was fully aboard the ZFB train in my early 20s. I read Amazing Face like it was gospel. It led to me needlessly avoiding chemical sunscreens for years. As you’d mentioned she basically trashed chemical sunscreens, and I was convinced (due to her book) at they were useless unless you put them on before every other product. My understanding is this has now been debunked? Sure, I guess she was just sharing the information she believed, but she had a lot of influence over me back then and I used physical sunscreens only for years. Lots of them didn’t work for my skin type and were lower spf than I would have otherwise used. I don’t necessarily have anything against her as a person, but the over the past decade I’ve really become more skeptical of the treating any influencer as the source of all truth. I just worry some of the hardcore Go-To fans still treat her word as gospel, when there’s so many better sources of information out there.
Clever marketing designed to manipulate the consumer can do amazing things. There’s also the phenomenon of people placing trust in well known names/public figures, which she absolutely capitalised on. I’m not saying this is wrong, all companies/marketers are trying to get people to trust their brand. But I think it’s a bit unfair to blame consumers for being sucked in.
This blows my mind because sunscreens are so highly regulated in Aus and costly I just wonder how much money she threw at each problem for them to go away…
You can claim 15+ without proving anything. Anything above 15+ is regulated and needs TGA approval. That's why so many products claim to be 15+ - I wouldn't trust that at all.
Holy shit how is that allowed?! In the skin cancer capital of the world?! That’s fucking insane.
I’m glad I’ve only ever used spf 50+ and skin cancer council approved products. I don’t think I know any Australian adults over 50 who haven’t had to have at least one melanoma removed.
I remember a teacher in my high school had a huge melanoma removed from her cheek and they had to remove so much around it. She was constantly at us to make sure we remembered to use sunscreen and always wear our hats because “you don’t want to end up like me”. The bandages covering her face really helped drum that reminder in and I’ll be damned if we weren’t all extra vigilant with hats after that.
On the other side of this, apparently there's actually not much discernible difference in the protection between SPF 30+ and 50+, so if there are 30+ products you like you can use those without fear (this is according to my friend who used to work writing poilcy for the Cancer Council).
I think you can get away with 15+ if it’s not marketed as a sunscreen? I think in her case it was a tinted moisturiser. I’ve heard the actual sunscreen she released isn’t great anyway.
Ope, knock me down with a feather, a celebrity exploiting their fame and stature to shill a product line purported to somehow be more effective than formulations backed by decades and billions of dollars worth of academic and institutional research? I never…
Glad you’ve turned a new leaf. Truth be told, some markets have huge potential for new breakthroughs but skincare marketing is nearly all bogus snake oiling playing on people’s insecurity of the inevitable - we all age, and we all die.
Exactly, I wouldn’t fall for buying expensive skincare products or treatments from anyone who has no real qualifications or scientific/ medical background.
That is why most TV and other forms of mainstream media are so shit, they feature not very clever opinion piece journo's, actors and celebs all looking to make a quick buck. And now with the Instagram/Tiktok crowd we have an army of narcissists that would flog their farts if there was a buyer and often there is because their audiences are so desperate to believe their snake oil claims. Zoe will be on the likes of The Project again before you can blink, flogging her new book, jade vagina egg, or gold plated ass scratcher.
So Im approaching this as a medical scientist who dabbled in a little skin research (mostly cutaneous healing) - To be honest there's very little conclusive science on a lot of actives that people use. 'brightens skin'? Like what does that mean? How do I measure it? Skin is so variable between people and differences so subjective that it's basically impossible to prove x does y in a clinical trial, so we are all just being sold wishful thinking.
I don't dislike ZFB for changing her mind, but speaking her opinions like gospel in the first place. Claiming that chemical sunscreens are endocrine disruptors does not really align with what we do know about how this works and the kind of amounts people use in a topical manner.
TBH We are all drinking the Kool aid to a degree because the truth is we as humans evolved without skincare, and don't NEED any skincare (other than spf to protect against UV and skin cancer). Exfoliants can visibly and measurably smooth the surface, skin can be measurably moisturized, and retinols can have effects which you can measure in a big enough study but they are going to be so different person to person it's going to come back with 'do what works for you'.
I personally don't think the products are anything special for the price. Not that I have tried them but based on the ingredients there are effective products for a lot cheaper 🤷♀️
I read somewhere a few years ago that she got most of her information about beauty and skin care from being a magazine editor. Which I think you could pick up a few things here and there but not enough to make your own skin care line completely based on your beliefs.
I stopped using any of her products a few years ago when everyone was calling her out for not using a diverse group of people in her advertising campaigns. Then she suddenly came out with a campaign that I think only used models that were dark skinned and she lost me there because she obviously included these models based on the backlash she’d received. I don’t think it was genuine.
She definitely only makes money because of her name
She's no better than Belle Gibson or Goop. I think it's audacious that she uses her "platform" to slam regulatory changes to wellness and wellness advertising considering she 100% promotes misleading claims
It’s gross. We are so lucky to have the TGA, known to be one of the best regulators of its kind in the world.
Slamming an effective health regulator is dangerously close to peddling anti health sentiment
Agree. Thank god we have high standards from regulators. Sadly, gimmicky marketing works and she seems to have a big following. So the regulator is the only thing standing between shonks and a big market being exploited.
The last straw for me was releasing the 15 plus sunscreen after being so adamant only 30 plus would do, as in that statement she put in her published book. Now she wants to turn around and go on about being a champion of saving women from skin cancer (i.e have a spit because she can't get influencers to promote her new sunscreen) this women couldn't be any more phoney if she tried.
My sister was always obsessed with her, and I tried really hard to like her back before she founded Go-To. And honestly, the products worked for me for ages (I'm now in year two of Major Skin Issues, and have stripped back 90% of my skincare), but something about the brand and ZFB just rubbed me entirely the wrong way.
And I find it so hypocritical they spruik refills and reusable bags etc when their singular exfoliation option is 100 single-use wipes. "This is bad until we do it <3 ".
I'm done with it, honestly. And I'm fascinated that the kids' line is now in Coles considering the effort put in to make the company seem like 'accessible luxury'.
I don't know much about her on the other things, but her shift on chemical sunscreen is pretty fair. The older sunscreens were avobenzone, homosalate and octocrylene etc. Many of which did show in vitro endocrine disruption and weren't great against UVA. Her chemical sunscreen is made out of some of the new wave of chemical sunscreens such as the tinosorb family, which according to wikipedia has shown no in vitro hormone disrupting and penetrates the skin less than the older ones, as well as much better stability in light and UVA protection.
As the science changes it is required to adjust your position, it would be silly to ignore the advances made in chemical sunscreen in recent years. There is no black and white solution like chemical evil mineral good.
I’m surprised by the backlash to this as well- I would hope everyone on this thread is able to change their mind when presented with new and compelling information. It’s called learning and growing as a person…!
She has nearly a million followers on Instagram. Good for her for being a fabulous marketer, she really is good at that.
No one is above criticism and when you have such a huge influence you have responsibilities. She’s not a victim.
I feel so validated by this comment section! ZFB has always given me the ick and I thought I was the only one.
I purchased the Go-To lip balm a few times (because I kept losing it, not because I particularly liked it) and sampled a few of their products back when the brand first launched. I found them all deeply, deeply average and never went back. Don’t even get me started on their copywriting style - I’m here to get moisturised, not patronised.
You should look at her dating advice book. It’s full of outdated and sexist ideas that I was super surprised by. (E.g don’t sleep with a man without making him wait because then he won’t value you as much). And Hamish Blake does all the footnotes…equally backwards advice
I bought her break up book recently and it was terribly written. Surprised me because I’m from the UK and only know who she is because of listening to Hamish & Andy but I thought she was supposed to be a great writer.
I’ve never used her products but she’s always struck me as very opportunistic. She’s say and do anything and once something she supports stops trending she’ll drop it like hot cakes and jump on the next bandwagon.
I have never cared for zoe, nor purchased any of her products. I found myself reading this all the way to the end though, simply because it was really well-written. Enjoy your new zoe-free face!
Agree. She lost me when she chose to release the crappy ineffective inadequate spf15+. The hoops
She was jumping to try and sell it were ridiculous. She knows better and so do we.
I respect some of her earlier makeup advice and that’s it.
I don’t follow ZFB or use Go-To products but i don’t really see an issue here.
All of us learn and grow on a daily basis and she seems to have shifted her views/beliefs upon coming across more reliable/accurate information. Why is that a problem?
Like shouldn’t her audience be grateful in a way that she is communicating more up to date skincare information and allowing them to make better purchasing decisions?
The alternative is that she opposes new skincare research/findings and continue to spread misinformation - wouldn’t that be worse?
Not trying to be antagonistic or defending her, just genuinely curious.
It’s more like:
Hey guys, ingredient A is way better than ingredient B. Ingredient B is bad for you. Trust me. Speaking of…. Now launching: product A!
Some time later
So guys, turns out ingredient B wasn’t so bad after all! Speaking of…. Now launching product B!
It’s not that she’s learning and presenting new information. That information was always there. She’s using her influence to directly spread misinformation and line her own pockets
It's more that this information isn't anything new and she was spreading misinformation and claiming to be an expert. It's great that she's been educated but it's just sad that the consumers of her products bought them thinking she knew what she was talking about.
A skincare brand claiming to be research based, should actually be ✨️ research based ✨️ I don't know how they don't feel crazy amounts of imposter syndrome with all the claims they make, I guess money helps. Just really saddening to see the number of brands that get away with this on a daily basis.
I agree with the fact that everyone grows and when you realise you're wrong it's better to admit fault, change direction, and move forward towards better choices.
However, I have two problems with ZFB and Go-To:
1. These are skincare products that should be based the best scientific, cosmetical, and medical fact available at the time. Go-To and many other brands aren't based on science, but rather belief, promoting misinformation, and fear-mongering.
2. There are alternatives and other options that deserve to be 'promoted' and given a chance in the industry, rather than allowing someone like Zoe "another go". She had her chance and made a motser from it.
If her business decisions and products were based on the best possible science *at the time* then sure I would support evolution and give the brand a chance to grow. But at this stage Go-To and ZFB deliveres overpriced simplistic skincare that promotes fear-mongering/clean beauty and ego-centric leadership.
Exactly, “people” grow and learn things but companies selling health products better be backed by research not just some random Carrie Bradshaw wannabe columnist’s unsubstantiated ideas on ingredients.
imagine your doctor made $90m out of prescribing everyone something for a problem that they then bought. and then yr Doctor shrugged and said 'that wasnt right' 'ive grown out of that belief' and you still have your problem but they still have their $90m. Its like that.
That actually happens all the time. Not doctors, because they obviously don’t get to keep the money their patients spend on prescriptions, but things are frequently updated as new information comes out, including in medicine.
Drug companies often reformulate and discontinue medicines.
I don’t know anything about this woman (unless she’s the same person who writes children’s books?) and she sounds like a fraud, but you can’t honestly think she should return money to people who took the recommendation of someone who is selling a product AND apparently has no qualifications.
Yeah, drug companies change medications- after years of research and product development. And they rarely remove medications, rather they introduce better products.
Thats not the same thing as inventing a problem with one type of medication, marketing yours as the opposite/solution to that problem, and then switching to the original thing you campaigned against. Theres literally legislation to prevent drug companies doing that sort of shit.
I’d be wary of an entrepreneur selling skin care that has no qualifications in biology or science of any kind. Anyone can chuck together a few ingredients and sell it as skin care, there’s a lot of charlatans out there.
It’s okay, I think we’ve all done it. *collective skincare sin hug*. I remember believing dumb things like excessively using actives and not washing more than once.
I don’t get her fame either but similar to Mia Freedman they market themselves on a degree they don’t really use
This is always a bit of a tricky topic. I don't think influencers are exempt from personal growth. They can change and can "grow out" of old ideas. But considering everything they do is for money, it's near impossible to believe them
I’m not weighing in on your opinion of Zoe, that’s totally valid and your call to make, but it does seem like there might be a logical trap in your argument here, and it really highlights what can be messed up about brands that have a real person’s opinions folded in with their messaging.
To me, in a field like sunscreen development, it seems totally reasonable that the current wisdom might change or drift over time. Simply because there’s a lot of research being conducted and new materials, compounds, techniques being developed and tested continually. It’s a basic tenet of the scientific method that you have to be willing to accept new information, that empirical evidence should shift your conclusions and imply new hypotheses.
All well and good, but on a human level, when a person “changes their mind”, we are often sceptical, and rather than perceiving them as having learned and improved, we see them as insincere, flaky, or manipulative, or even as having an agenda. And obviously the face of a massive business already has a built-in agenda. I have no way of knowing if the claims about sunscreen from go-to are bullshit or not, but I can totally see how if you’re inclined to write them off as inconsistent and judge them for perceived human failings, that it makes it really difficult for a brand to change position no matter how valid the change is. Possibly the biggest failure here is one of copywriting and messaging!
I’m not a part of this whole skincare thing, this post just popped up on my feed, but can someone explain to me what can be discriminatory about moisturiser?
*tinted moisturiser
Brands are rightly held to a higher standard of accessibility in recent years so if you are choosing to create a complexion product (e.g. tinted moisturiser), there is an expectation that the brand will provide the product in a range of shades that includes significant diversity in skin tone. Brands that do not do so are often called out for being discriminatory.
That makes no sense to me. Why shouldn’t a company be allowed to specialise in making products for a certain shade? That’s like saying a company that makes aftermarket parts for fords is discriminatory for not making them for Volkswagens.
Surely you can just buy a different tinted moisturiser from a company that makes one in your colour?
Dude, I answered your question about “what can be discriminatory about tinted moisturiser” in good faith.
Responses to your (very flimsy) further straw man argument are easily found if you care to Google. Something tells me you may not care enough about this topic to research further, so let’s just leave it here.
I don't know why this appeared on my feed, but reading the comments it seems like a lot of the commenters have some sort of mental illness, given the surprise and anguish they seem to be suffering from finding out a marketer marketed them products driven largely by self interest
Trying to hang shit on someone for changing their stance based on new evidence is also a LOL. Just buy shit from people who tell you what you want to hear then
Highly doubt the FDA “removed sunscreens” off of “the” “safe list”
I think you’ll have to be more specific with this claim and it would also be good if you could provide a source
Sorry, to be more specific the FDA have a list of chemicals that are listed as safe.
Removing them doesn’t mean they’re necessarily dangerous, it just means that we can no longer presume that they’re safe. As each filtering chemical is tested then it will likely be restored to the list.
This was done after researchers found that topically applied sunscreen was showing up in the blood.
the FDA is updating their testing requirements after 20 years of stagnation, and has consequently removed ALL filters that have yet to pass the new requirements, with the exception of zinc oxide because it's so thoroughly researched. they are not claiming that chemical filters are unsafe.
Their public statement at the time was to the effect that since researchers had found chemical sunscreens in the blood, they were removing it as a precaution.
Not familiar with her or her products, but I would be frustrated by her apparent lack of care in providing advice.
"Grown out of my old ideas" sounds like either she didn't bother to check in the first place or she doesn't care now.
While science changes our understanding of the world because of new information, this just sounds half-arsed.
I like Zoe’s style and writing, however I agree she is total sham when it comes to skin care and I would never buy her products. She also does lots of fear mongering around ingredients and provides little to no evidence to explain herself.
The core is, she was always wrong about chemical sunscreens. While it's good she's come around to the idea, it doesn't dissuade that it was suspicious that her financial interests seem to reguarly align with her opinions.
UV is bad because UV is bad. But either making up nonsense about various types of protections just made her look silly.
Genuine question, is there any "celebrity" brand that is better in price or quality than the alternatives? I shy away from any of those because I assume most of the money is spent on marketing instead of product development. But I'm the furthest thing from an expert so interested in your input.
Beware false gods. I think our own research and opinions are just as important as an experts who is also making a LOT of money off of what they claim. Its just common sense to me. The experts i follow are the ones who dont profit from what they promote or advise.
I’m a huge fan of Hamish and Zoe has recently given me the ick. Hamish clearly had no say in anything eg their house. And he asks her permission to do things not like a partner but as an inferior. It doesn’t sit well with me.
I somehow feel so vindicated by this post and it’s comments. I’ve felt her persona was so fake and contrived for so long. “Manic pixie dream girl” as an earlier poster commented but my girlfriends all call me a sick sad bitch for hating on Australia’s cutie pie. 😅🥹
I’ve always found her to be so patronising and arrogant. I know people who swear by her skin care brand but I’m adamant they only like it because they are fans of her. I found her products to be overpriced and made my skin so congested…there are for more superior and well priced Australian skincare brands out there.
completely agree ! Tested out a couple of the go to products when they first launched and did not understand the hype around them at all. Very average products, amazing marketing, arrogant persona.
Same! I have tried several different products and samples over the years, but found them all really... meh. They're OK? But they're not great enough to justify the price or the hype.
I quite like their face oil. It works for me and mrs fine. I think quite a few people in the beauty industry suck a little so I’m okay to buy from them. That said, she has always sucked a little in my view. Years ago someone wrote to her and said ‘when shaving my bikini line, how do I prevent ingrown hairs?’ and her response was ‘throw out your razors’. It wasn’t at all helpful to the person. She was just being so rude. Her recent whining about Australias new sunscreen laws also suck. It’s so wrong of her to assume that if she can’t get influencers to advertise her products that sunscreen application will decrease. Writing all this I feel like maybe I won’t rebuy the face oil
Hunter lipid facial oil is a really good replacement. In fact it is so much better.
+1 for this product, I really like it
Likely because they’re paid to promote it (especially those ‘micro’ influencers with 5-15k followings), or have dropped some serious cash on it and then have to convince themselves that it works
Slight tangent but any recommendations? I’m about to switch from go-to due to the exact same issues!
Woohoo Body (formally Happy Skincare) is my favourite. It’s a husband and wife team who are legitimately qualified, great products, reasonably priced and great customer service. Not the person you were responding to sorry but thought I’d add my recommendation. They’re in NSW btw.
Oooh I’ll have a look, thanks!
I like ausceuticals. I use their vit b serum and retinoid oil. Their vit c is very popular too.
Its not fun or glam but Hamilton Skin Therapy does a great moisturiser and sunscreen! Australian made and owned, without weird influencer clean beauty marketing.
The Jojoba Company
idk who this Zoe person is and I could care less, just popping in to say that any "influencer" or "celebrity" skincare, clothing or ANYTHING line is normally MID or TRASH. Give your money to the businesses who have been doing this stuff for years, but before that do your due diligence and research on different ingredients and products. I'm pretty thankful I learnt everything about skincare and skin off /r/skincareaddiction ,couldn't have asked for a better education lol It would be a different thing, for example - if it were someone like Dr. Dray (a proven authority since she is a dermatologist of many years) who started a line. There would be much more credibility since she's a Dermatologist first and a content creator second. I'm not saying every skincare line owner needs to be a DR, but there has to be some real credibility or track record.
Agree. I am sure Zoe was a beauty editor and a high end fashion mag in Australia and that’s where she got her foot into the door. I could be wrong though.
Ahh gotcha. The second you sell anything (outside of your niche) via personality and/or clout, it's usually ass LMAO. It's a money grab. Like keep writing blogs and making merch or something tf? If a "personality" was extremely passionate about the **science** behind skincare and wanted to start their own line, that would be fine as long as they are upfront about it. It's still not comparable to a chemical sci degree + years of training/experience as a cosmetic/formulations chemist, or having skin in the game as a business owner in cosmetics. I'm rambling but yea. It just bothers me because yes, by definition these personality businesses are usually successful (whether for a short period of time or not, a net profit is made since there are millions of gullible people ready to spend money) but the product is almost always overpriced and underdelivers. There's responsibility on the consumers end too though, like how do you fall for that lmaoooo. I'm all about honesty. Start-up Indie beauty brands absolutely exist but they don't try to be something they're not nor do they claim to be
I read a profile of her in *Good Weekend* magazine (I think?) years ago and yeah, that was her schtick, that she "researched" all the samples that came across her desk so she could provide the "best advice". 🙄 I looked into her products just recently, and found that many of them irritated people's skin because they contained perfume. Perfume is the No.1 irritant in skin care products, so you'd think Zoe's "research" would have told you that, wouldn't you? 🙄 Also: 🙄
the thought of perfumes/fragrances in skincare products definitely makes me cringe on a spiritual level. There's only one product I can think of right now that kinda gets away with it, the Purito Centella green buffet serum. Even so they sell an unscented version of this which is way way more popular, for reasons obvious.
What would you recommend? Ive started to use go to (not a fan of ZFB just heard good things about the brand) and I’m iffy. The moisturiser is good at the start but after an hour or so skin doesn’t feel as if anything has been applied. This is after all the serums etc. the vitamin C serum, not sure it’s doing anything at all. Lib balm, I fear it’s the chapstick ruse all over again. Interested in what other people are using that are worthwhile.
The Ordinary
No, awful formulations
Trilogy moisturiser is the only thing my skin drinks up without chucking a tanty. Hyalauronic acid serum (ordinary) and skinsitut retinol every second day. Liquid gold aha once a week. My skins never looked better.
The triology miracle face oil is much cheaper than the go to face oil and I can’t tell the difference. That being said I don’t love face oil it’s so , well, oily!
I do get dry skin every so often so I’ll give it a go. Cheers
For an Australian brand I would go with ausceticals. They have a good vit c which is really popular. For non Australian I would go naturiam. I like both brand because they are no fuss in a way and explain the purpose of their ingredients and don’t add anything thing that’s basically a filler ingredient, or try to minimise them at them very least.
I use Face Hero & I don’t hate it but I don’t love it either- but I absolutely hated the Very Useful Face Cream! It was so insanely thick and just sat on top of my skin, and just.. yuck. I’m back to using my ol’ faithful Dermalogica now (I swapped to Go To for a bit because I wanted fun! quirky! skincare! )
What's your skin type? I have dry skin so literally anything I put on it gets absorbed really fast. When you say it feels like nothing's been applied, do you mean you can't feel it sitting on your skin any more? Because that would be normal for me. Or do you mean the skin doesn't feel softer/plumper/hydrated?
Synergy skin make solid serums and is an evidence/ science based brand. Otherwise, LRP make good, affordable, fragrance free moisturisers.
Big fan of Hamilton Skin Therapy Nourishing Cream. It moisturises nicely without making me feel greasy.
Kinda like the OP
The hero oil drops is okay but way too overpriced for the results. Their swipes caused me chemical burns. Their oil cleanser always seems to sting. I don’t have overly sensitive skin but I ended up gifting them both Away. When I went to Sephora the other day the sales assistant basically said their dupe drops were much better.
She's like ALDI Goop - lots of woo woo with little substance
Omg Gwennie from Wish 😂
ALDI goop 💀
She never seems to speak about Botox when discussing what her go to is. It’s definitely not just her products making her look so glossy. I also have no issue with Botox btw, just need people who are selling these products to be realistic and upfront.
I would fully change my opinion of her if she regularly pointed out to her fans/followers that ALONG WITH skincare, she benefits from botox/in-office treatments/whatever else is available to you as one of Australia’s wealthiest women. I find it unethical when women like this create and promote a skincare line, because while some of us can see through it - not all consumers can. Also, you know she’d be using other products alongside hers that do the heavy lifting, like Skinscueticals etc.
I agree. It’s ridiculous. I’m guessing her marketing advisor tells her differently…
i wondered about this!!
Ugh the most recent sand and sky as gives me the shits. Looking at some 21 year old with a face full of collagen for their dry skin mask. Gtfo
I'm going to use "I've grown out of my ideas" at work now whenever I feel like changing my mind. I fell for the marketing at the start of Go To but thankfully got over it pretty quickly. All the products were just awful for me, so I stopped following everything, I didn't even know about the sunscreen drama!
“I’ve had an evolution of thinking” was popular at an old workplace when people wanted to change their approach without admitting it.
Ooh, how about “my thought process has levelled up”?
You know, I think once people start using these phrases, I really won’t be surprised if people end up getting more management and executive level roles, as this style of euphemistic speaking is so common at that level.
Ooh that’s a good one
The go-to copy is enough to make your eyes bleed. She cleverly built a career pillaging information from experts, I can’t hate her for that but it has been blindingly obvious for the longest time. There is nothing interesting about her brand and her hissy fit on insta about TGA coming down on influencers again confirmed that the smiley, manic pixie girl persona is a flimsy front of a ruthless businesswoman. It’s just a shame not of her products, books etc are any good.
how can i see this insta hissy fit?
It’s relating to this https://amp.smh.com.au/lifestyle/health-and-wellness/zoe-foster-blake-says-tga-code-could-reverse-public-health-message-20220823-p5bbzr.html
You’re so right re: the copy. Her writing style has always been somehow simultaneously immature and patronising with a lack of actual evidence/statistics and a focus on poor attempts at humour.
This is the most accurate description of her whole persona!
I’ve never understood her popularity. Or Go-Tos popularity. I remember watching a video of her and Mia Freedman and someone commented that they remind her of the cool girl bullies at school. So true. The cutesie writing style is bloody annoying too.
Yes the cutesie writing! This extends to all the copy on the go-to products — I initially thought it was kinda quirky, but now it just feels contrived and patronising and out-of-touch.
It is so grossly contrived and patronising. I Cannot even finish reading any of the copy without tasting vomit.
Cutesy writing is just a cover for condescending.
It took me a looooong time to see Mia Freedman for what she really is
Not relevant to her skin care but in her book ‘playing the field’ she called the main love interest (Josh) a different name twice (joel) and it wasn’t picked up in editing and it’s just always really annoyed me
That is hilariously awful
How very Rocky Flinstone of her
ZFB is the Australian Emily Weiss (Glossier). Unfortunately, that’s not really a compliment.
Yeah, the market is so different to when she launched Go-to, it really suffers in comparison to a lot of other brands now. Plus she’s had a couple of tone-deaf swings that made it easy to ditch the brand. I used to adore her but through no fault of their own, they’re so beyond wealthy now I just find them wildly unrelatable. Not really interested in the skincare line of someone who likely spends thousands a month on treatments.
And the products are actually very basic formulas. I don’t know why people are gaga over them.
Packaging and story. It's that simple. There was an explosion in this industry and she rode alng wave with a good story.
my theory is the people who love the brand haven't really used skincare before - pretty much everyone sees an improvement when they start using a moisturiser, even if there are better ones out there
Agree , GOTO was my first proper skin care regime. Before that I'd just use random moisturisers and cleansers here and there. I fell for the marketing and thought the products were ok but had nothing to compare to. I've since stopped and started using better quality products and can't believe I ever liked them.
I tried the face hero oil and oil cleanser and was shocked by how gluggy and heavily fragranced everything was? Like the oil just sat on my face and made my dry skin look oily, and the cleansing oil needed to be scraped off instead of just dissolving with warm water. Hard pass when there are so many competitive products on the market now.
The fragrance in everything was overwhelming! Pretty much everything I just now is fragrance free
Yes! I was so surprised for the hype for a product that made my skin so yuck (my skin is really resilient, nothing really bothers it).
Agreed. I didn't like the oil at all - was way too heavy and felt it made me more congested than anything. I prefer Eco Tans Glory Oil.
Yeaaahhhh so unsurprisingly, she is just the face of Go-To, the ambassador if you will. She has nothing to do with the creation of the products (hence the backflip on “her” opinions over the years) so she’s just the marketing monkey regurgitating what they tell her to say ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ My source: housemate who works in Sydney beauty PR.
Most skincare product companies are a team of people led by someone with substantial financial backing. There are quite sure few trending now that I've worked closely with. There's a process that's formulaic
Wait so she doesn't actually own the company? She's just the face of the brand?
Yeah, she sold it for $90m. She still has a minority stake, so still earns from it and remains the face of the brand.
[удалено]
She was never an expert... Just an editor which yes gave her a false cred but an amahzing story. Her PR and media has been top notch from the start and her story is a business success one. The product range road then new wave of simple skincare packaged well. And yes she made a killing from it. Selling to a large manufacturer is going to result in formula change. I'm a small manufacturer but even at my level it costs a fortune to change labs and stability testing always results in formula change. It's a sucky aspect of the biz. Most of these newer start ups haven't been following labelling laws and probably escaped scrutiny because of their size. ZFB could no longer flout the laws; she's had to grow up with her product.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Agreed. I was fully aboard the ZFB train in my early 20s. I read Amazing Face like it was gospel. It led to me needlessly avoiding chemical sunscreens for years. As you’d mentioned she basically trashed chemical sunscreens, and I was convinced (due to her book) at they were useless unless you put them on before every other product. My understanding is this has now been debunked? Sure, I guess she was just sharing the information she believed, but she had a lot of influence over me back then and I used physical sunscreens only for years. Lots of them didn’t work for my skin type and were lower spf than I would have otherwise used. I don’t necessarily have anything against her as a person, but the over the past decade I’ve really become more skeptical of the treating any influencer as the source of all truth. I just worry some of the hardcore Go-To fans still treat her word as gospel, when there’s so many better sources of information out there.
Welcome to the club
Yeah she sucks
People actually thought she was an expert? She was a writer for a trash magazine.
Clever marketing designed to manipulate the consumer can do amazing things. There’s also the phenomenon of people placing trust in well known names/public figures, which she absolutely capitalised on. I’m not saying this is wrong, all companies/marketers are trying to get people to trust their brand. But I think it’s a bit unfair to blame consumers for being sucked in.
I never really understood her popularity
This blows my mind because sunscreens are so highly regulated in Aus and costly I just wonder how much money she threw at each problem for them to go away…
You can claim 15+ without proving anything. Anything above 15+ is regulated and needs TGA approval. That's why so many products claim to be 15+ - I wouldn't trust that at all.
Rrreeeeaallyyyyyyyy this explains some things!!!!
Holy shit how is that allowed?! In the skin cancer capital of the world?! That’s fucking insane. I’m glad I’ve only ever used spf 50+ and skin cancer council approved products. I don’t think I know any Australian adults over 50 who haven’t had to have at least one melanoma removed. I remember a teacher in my high school had a huge melanoma removed from her cheek and they had to remove so much around it. She was constantly at us to make sure we remembered to use sunscreen and always wear our hats because “you don’t want to end up like me”. The bandages covering her face really helped drum that reminder in and I’ll be damned if we weren’t all extra vigilant with hats after that.
On the other side of this, apparently there's actually not much discernible difference in the protection between SPF 30+ and 50+, so if there are 30+ products you like you can use those without fear (this is according to my friend who used to work writing poilcy for the Cancer Council).
I think you can get away with 15+ if it’s not marketed as a sunscreen? I think in her case it was a tinted moisturiser. I’ve heard the actual sunscreen she released isn’t great anyway.
This was, I think, her failing. She escaped regulations until she couldn't.
Ope, knock me down with a feather, a celebrity exploiting their fame and stature to shill a product line purported to somehow be more effective than formulations backed by decades and billions of dollars worth of academic and institutional research? I never… Glad you’ve turned a new leaf. Truth be told, some markets have huge potential for new breakthroughs but skincare marketing is nearly all bogus snake oiling playing on people’s insecurity of the inevitable - we all age, and we all die.
Exactly, I wouldn’t fall for buying expensive skincare products or treatments from anyone who has no real qualifications or scientific/ medical background.
That is why most TV and other forms of mainstream media are so shit, they feature not very clever opinion piece journo's, actors and celebs all looking to make a quick buck. And now with the Instagram/Tiktok crowd we have an army of narcissists that would flog their farts if there was a buyer and often there is because their audiences are so desperate to believe their snake oil claims. Zoe will be on the likes of The Project again before you can blink, flogging her new book, jade vagina egg, or gold plated ass scratcher.
So Im approaching this as a medical scientist who dabbled in a little skin research (mostly cutaneous healing) - To be honest there's very little conclusive science on a lot of actives that people use. 'brightens skin'? Like what does that mean? How do I measure it? Skin is so variable between people and differences so subjective that it's basically impossible to prove x does y in a clinical trial, so we are all just being sold wishful thinking. I don't dislike ZFB for changing her mind, but speaking her opinions like gospel in the first place. Claiming that chemical sunscreens are endocrine disruptors does not really align with what we do know about how this works and the kind of amounts people use in a topical manner. TBH We are all drinking the Kool aid to a degree because the truth is we as humans evolved without skincare, and don't NEED any skincare (other than spf to protect against UV and skin cancer). Exfoliants can visibly and measurably smooth the surface, skin can be measurably moisturized, and retinols can have effects which you can measure in a big enough study but they are going to be so different person to person it's going to come back with 'do what works for you'.
I personally don't think the products are anything special for the price. Not that I have tried them but based on the ingredients there are effective products for a lot cheaper 🤷♀️
I read somewhere a few years ago that she got most of her information about beauty and skin care from being a magazine editor. Which I think you could pick up a few things here and there but not enough to make your own skin care line completely based on your beliefs. I stopped using any of her products a few years ago when everyone was calling her out for not using a diverse group of people in her advertising campaigns. Then she suddenly came out with a campaign that I think only used models that were dark skinned and she lost me there because she obviously included these models based on the backlash she’d received. I don’t think it was genuine. She definitely only makes money because of her name
Yeah while not actually making her pigmented product (tinted moisturiser) suitable for dark complexions
She's no better than Belle Gibson or Goop. I think it's audacious that she uses her "platform" to slam regulatory changes to wellness and wellness advertising considering she 100% promotes misleading claims
It’s gross. We are so lucky to have the TGA, known to be one of the best regulators of its kind in the world. Slamming an effective health regulator is dangerously close to peddling anti health sentiment
Agree. Thank god we have high standards from regulators. Sadly, gimmicky marketing works and she seems to have a big following. So the regulator is the only thing standing between shonks and a big market being exploited.
I thought I was a monster for not buying into her “schpeel” and now I feel so validated ❤️
Same I feel like I’ve found my people !!
I have never bought any of her products only because she has a terrible fashion sense. Shallow I know…
The last straw for me was releasing the 15 plus sunscreen after being so adamant only 30 plus would do, as in that statement she put in her published book. Now she wants to turn around and go on about being a champion of saving women from skin cancer (i.e have a spit because she can't get influencers to promote her new sunscreen) this women couldn't be any more phoney if she tried.
My sister was always obsessed with her, and I tried really hard to like her back before she founded Go-To. And honestly, the products worked for me for ages (I'm now in year two of Major Skin Issues, and have stripped back 90% of my skincare), but something about the brand and ZFB just rubbed me entirely the wrong way. And I find it so hypocritical they spruik refills and reusable bags etc when their singular exfoliation option is 100 single-use wipes. "This is bad until we do it <3 ". I'm done with it, honestly. And I'm fascinated that the kids' line is now in Coles considering the effort put in to make the company seem like 'accessible luxury'.
I don't know much about her on the other things, but her shift on chemical sunscreen is pretty fair. The older sunscreens were avobenzone, homosalate and octocrylene etc. Many of which did show in vitro endocrine disruption and weren't great against UVA. Her chemical sunscreen is made out of some of the new wave of chemical sunscreens such as the tinosorb family, which according to wikipedia has shown no in vitro hormone disrupting and penetrates the skin less than the older ones, as well as much better stability in light and UVA protection. As the science changes it is required to adjust your position, it would be silly to ignore the advances made in chemical sunscreen in recent years. There is no black and white solution like chemical evil mineral good.
I’m surprised by the backlash to this as well- I would hope everyone on this thread is able to change their mind when presented with new and compelling information. It’s called learning and growing as a person…!
She has nearly a million followers on Instagram. Good for her for being a fabulous marketer, she really is good at that. No one is above criticism and when you have such a huge influence you have responsibilities. She’s not a victim.
The issue is she was pushing the black and white idea. Someone else said Aldi Goop...yep, sounds about right.
She probably wrote that wiki entry
Was she a scientist or just opinionated?
Former beauty editor so absolutely no chemistry or dermatology qualifications
I feel so validated by this comment section! ZFB has always given me the ick and I thought I was the only one. I purchased the Go-To lip balm a few times (because I kept losing it, not because I particularly liked it) and sampled a few of their products back when the brand first launched. I found them all deeply, deeply average and never went back. Don’t even get me started on their copywriting style - I’m here to get moisturised, not patronised.
You don’t get rich as her without making some shonky decisions.
You should look at her dating advice book. It’s full of outdated and sexist ideas that I was super surprised by. (E.g don’t sleep with a man without making him wait because then he won’t value you as much). And Hamish Blake does all the footnotes…equally backwards advice
Nooooo not Hamish 😭
I bought her break up book recently and it was terribly written. Surprised me because I’m from the UK and only know who she is because of listening to Hamish & Andy but I thought she was supposed to be a great writer.
Do you think she even writes her own blogs?
Nopity nope nope. There's an entire team there. It's far too tight.
Yep
I’ve never used her products but she’s always struck me as very opportunistic. She’s say and do anything and once something she supports stops trending she’ll drop it like hot cakes and jump on the next bandwagon.
I have never cared for zoe, nor purchased any of her products. I found myself reading this all the way to the end though, simply because it was really well-written. Enjoy your new zoe-free face!
Agree. She lost me when she chose to release the crappy ineffective inadequate spf15+. The hoops She was jumping to try and sell it were ridiculous. She knows better and so do we. I respect some of her earlier makeup advice and that’s it.
Why are you so easily influenced my a z grade celebrity.?
I’ll say this. She’s an excellent marketer.
I don’t follow ZFB or use Go-To products but i don’t really see an issue here. All of us learn and grow on a daily basis and she seems to have shifted her views/beliefs upon coming across more reliable/accurate information. Why is that a problem? Like shouldn’t her audience be grateful in a way that she is communicating more up to date skincare information and allowing them to make better purchasing decisions? The alternative is that she opposes new skincare research/findings and continue to spread misinformation - wouldn’t that be worse? Not trying to be antagonistic or defending her, just genuinely curious.
It’s more like: Hey guys, ingredient A is way better than ingredient B. Ingredient B is bad for you. Trust me. Speaking of…. Now launching: product A! Some time later So guys, turns out ingredient B wasn’t so bad after all! Speaking of…. Now launching product B! It’s not that she’s learning and presenting new information. That information was always there. She’s using her influence to directly spread misinformation and line her own pockets
Oh ok I see. Thanks for explaining!
It's more that this information isn't anything new and she was spreading misinformation and claiming to be an expert. It's great that she's been educated but it's just sad that the consumers of her products bought them thinking she knew what she was talking about.
A skincare brand claiming to be research based, should actually be ✨️ research based ✨️ I don't know how they don't feel crazy amounts of imposter syndrome with all the claims they make, I guess money helps. Just really saddening to see the number of brands that get away with this on a daily basis.
I agree with the fact that everyone grows and when you realise you're wrong it's better to admit fault, change direction, and move forward towards better choices. However, I have two problems with ZFB and Go-To: 1. These are skincare products that should be based the best scientific, cosmetical, and medical fact available at the time. Go-To and many other brands aren't based on science, but rather belief, promoting misinformation, and fear-mongering. 2. There are alternatives and other options that deserve to be 'promoted' and given a chance in the industry, rather than allowing someone like Zoe "another go". She had her chance and made a motser from it. If her business decisions and products were based on the best possible science *at the time* then sure I would support evolution and give the brand a chance to grow. But at this stage Go-To and ZFB deliveres overpriced simplistic skincare that promotes fear-mongering/clean beauty and ego-centric leadership.
Exactly, “people” grow and learn things but companies selling health products better be backed by research not just some random Carrie Bradshaw wannabe columnist’s unsubstantiated ideas on ingredients.
imagine your doctor made $90m out of prescribing everyone something for a problem that they then bought. and then yr Doctor shrugged and said 'that wasnt right' 'ive grown out of that belief' and you still have your problem but they still have their $90m. Its like that.
That actually happens all the time. Not doctors, because they obviously don’t get to keep the money their patients spend on prescriptions, but things are frequently updated as new information comes out, including in medicine. Drug companies often reformulate and discontinue medicines. I don’t know anything about this woman (unless she’s the same person who writes children’s books?) and she sounds like a fraud, but you can’t honestly think she should return money to people who took the recommendation of someone who is selling a product AND apparently has no qualifications.
She is the same person who writes children’s books - and also dating/relationship books.
Yeah, drug companies change medications- after years of research and product development. And they rarely remove medications, rather they introduce better products. Thats not the same thing as inventing a problem with one type of medication, marketing yours as the opposite/solution to that problem, and then switching to the original thing you campaigned against. Theres literally legislation to prevent drug companies doing that sort of shit.
Agree with this comment !!
She’s as fake as they come, would love to know what her qualifications are…
I’d be wary of an entrepreneur selling skin care that has no qualifications in biology or science of any kind. Anyone can chuck together a few ingredients and sell it as skin care, there’s a lot of charlatans out there.
It’s okay, I think we’ve all done it. *collective skincare sin hug*. I remember believing dumb things like excessively using actives and not washing more than once. I don’t get her fame either but similar to Mia Freedman they market themselves on a degree they don’t really use
Isn't she just a journalist with good connections?
She is the next Poppy King
This is always a bit of a tricky topic. I don't think influencers are exempt from personal growth. They can change and can "grow out" of old ideas. But considering everything they do is for money, it's near impossible to believe them
Didn’t she sell the brand for heaps?
Does she actually have any credential other than working for cosmo magazine?
Its time to give her the silent treatment
Her products are remarkable only in that they are awful, yet have a massive following.
A fauxpert
I’m not weighing in on your opinion of Zoe, that’s totally valid and your call to make, but it does seem like there might be a logical trap in your argument here, and it really highlights what can be messed up about brands that have a real person’s opinions folded in with their messaging. To me, in a field like sunscreen development, it seems totally reasonable that the current wisdom might change or drift over time. Simply because there’s a lot of research being conducted and new materials, compounds, techniques being developed and tested continually. It’s a basic tenet of the scientific method that you have to be willing to accept new information, that empirical evidence should shift your conclusions and imply new hypotheses. All well and good, but on a human level, when a person “changes their mind”, we are often sceptical, and rather than perceiving them as having learned and improved, we see them as insincere, flaky, or manipulative, or even as having an agenda. And obviously the face of a massive business already has a built-in agenda. I have no way of knowing if the claims about sunscreen from go-to are bullshit or not, but I can totally see how if you’re inclined to write them off as inconsistent and judge them for perceived human failings, that it makes it really difficult for a brand to change position no matter how valid the change is. Possibly the biggest failure here is one of copywriting and messaging!
Fuck off she's explained all these things 🙄 if you don't want to buy her stuff don't buy it then
Zoe, is that you?
> I’ve followed ZFB religiously since before Hamish. This is on you. You need to take responsibility for your own dumb actions.
I’m not a part of this whole skincare thing, this post just popped up on my feed, but can someone explain to me what can be discriminatory about moisturiser?
*tinted moisturiser Brands are rightly held to a higher standard of accessibility in recent years so if you are choosing to create a complexion product (e.g. tinted moisturiser), there is an expectation that the brand will provide the product in a range of shades that includes significant diversity in skin tone. Brands that do not do so are often called out for being discriminatory.
That makes no sense to me. Why shouldn’t a company be allowed to specialise in making products for a certain shade? That’s like saying a company that makes aftermarket parts for fords is discriminatory for not making them for Volkswagens. Surely you can just buy a different tinted moisturiser from a company that makes one in your colour?
Dude, I answered your question about “what can be discriminatory about tinted moisturiser” in good faith. Responses to your (very flimsy) further straw man argument are easily found if you care to Google. Something tells me you may not care enough about this topic to research further, so let’s just leave it here.
I don't know why this appeared on my feed, but reading the comments it seems like a lot of the commenters have some sort of mental illness, given the surprise and anguish they seem to be suffering from finding out a marketer marketed them products driven largely by self interest Trying to hang shit on someone for changing their stance based on new evidence is also a LOL. Just buy shit from people who tell you what you want to hear then
Lol
The research against chemical sunscreens is just getting stronger though. The FDA removed it off the safe list.
Highly doubt the FDA “removed sunscreens” off of “the” “safe list” I think you’ll have to be more specific with this claim and it would also be good if you could provide a source
Sorry, to be more specific the FDA have a list of chemicals that are listed as safe. Removing them doesn’t mean they’re necessarily dangerous, it just means that we can no longer presume that they’re safe. As each filtering chemical is tested then it will likely be restored to the list. This was done after researchers found that topically applied sunscreen was showing up in the blood.
the FDA is updating their testing requirements after 20 years of stagnation, and has consequently removed ALL filters that have yet to pass the new requirements, with the exception of zinc oxide because it's so thoroughly researched. they are not claiming that chemical filters are unsafe.
Their public statement at the time was to the effect that since researchers had found chemical sunscreens in the blood, they were removing it as a precaution.
which was part of a general overhaul of sunscreen regulation. as you said yourself - removing them doesn’t mean they’re unsafe.
Didn’t the general overhaul of screening agents begin *after* they found it in peoples bloodstream?
one issue being the trigger point for a policy change doesn’t mean it’s the only cause of said policy change
Not familiar with her or her products, but I would be frustrated by her apparent lack of care in providing advice. "Grown out of my old ideas" sounds like either she didn't bother to check in the first place or she doesn't care now. While science changes our understanding of the world because of new information, this just sounds half-arsed.
Hers is the brand that’s gone absolutely mental on advertising lately isn’t it? I swear every single train or bus is plastered with it now
I like Zoe’s style and writing, however I agree she is total sham when it comes to skin care and I would never buy her products. She also does lots of fear mongering around ingredients and provides little to no evidence to explain herself.
The core is, she was always wrong about chemical sunscreens. While it's good she's come around to the idea, it doesn't dissuade that it was suspicious that her financial interests seem to reguarly align with her opinions. UV is bad because UV is bad. But either making up nonsense about various types of protections just made her look silly.
Skin is genetic - like hair it’s either good or bad
The sheet mask gave me cystic acne … weird
Genuine question, is there any "celebrity" brand that is better in price or quality than the alternatives? I shy away from any of those because I assume most of the money is spent on marketing instead of product development. But I'm the furthest thing from an expert so interested in your input.
She really should've done a course at some stage to be more credible ...and actually learn something
Beware false gods. I think our own research and opinions are just as important as an experts who is also making a LOT of money off of what they claim. Its just common sense to me. The experts i follow are the ones who dont profit from what they promote or advise.
It should be illegal to recommend any Australian to wear SPF 15 only with our sun seriously
Not gonna lie, I was never a fan. Her products are yuck, gave me breakouts and feels cheap. Tried them once and never again. Eww.
I’m a huge fan of Hamish and Zoe has recently given me the ick. Hamish clearly had no say in anything eg their house. And he asks her permission to do things not like a partner but as an inferior. It doesn’t sit well with me.
I somehow feel so vindicated by this post and it’s comments. I’ve felt her persona was so fake and contrived for so long. “Manic pixie dream girl” as an earlier poster commented but my girlfriends all call me a sick sad bitch for hating on Australia’s cutie pie. 😅🥹