Social media has not only made information more accessible, but it's made it so much harder to preserve privacy.
For social media influencers, it's important for them to be as discreet as they can be about their living location and frequent places that they visit, because otherwise their followers and viewers could begin to piece together where they go and where they live.
This unfortunately could lead to unhealthy relationships, visits from the public to their homes, and even stalking.
These were the things that TikToker Melissa Ann Marie was concerned about when she was working with a designer who wanted to display her kitchen remodel in their portfolio online, which could potentially doxx her to her community of over 185,000 followers, not including the many people who might be watching without following her account.
In the text overlay of the video, Marie wrote:
"My kitchen designer canceled my $40K remodel because I wouldn't pay a privacy fee to keep my home off their social media."
In the video, the TikToker then explained that there was a clause in the contract, stating that the designer had the right to portray the home on their website, portfolio, and social media accounts. In Marie's case, that would include her location, the front of her home, the supplies used to create her kitchen, and her kitchen before and after the remodel.
If a customer complied with this clause, there would be no extra charge. To get out of the clause, a customer would be charged an "inconvenience fee" of $300, because the designer found it inconvenient to miss out on the chance to update their portfolio.
Because the kitchen designer was so localized, with their location being a big part of their branding, it would be very easy for a person to look at the photographs of Marie's kitchen design and locate her home, based on her home's distinctive qualities and the location of the kitchen designer's business.
But when Marie voiced her concerns as a public figure, the designer pushed back, stating that she would have to pay the $300 like anyone else.
Since she was upfront about her concerns, Marie did not think this was fair and requested that the clause be omitted from her contract. Despite being an influencer, she was paying for the design in full, rather than receiving some or all of it in a collaboration.
It also seemed more plausible to her that the designer should be paying their customers to use their property for their portfolio, rather than customers having to pay to preserve their privacy, after already paying the designer for their services.
The designer did not appreciate this feedback and canceled the entire design job, costing their own company $40,000 instead of simply omitting the $300.
You can watch the first video here:
To make the situation worse, the company soon saw Marie's TikTok and sent her a series of messages, confronting her about "defaming" their company, despite her omitting the company's name and location.
They continued to argue with Marie about her initial privacy concerns before stating that they were in the process of contacting their lawyer to organize a "defamation" charge against her.
You can watch the second video here:
Viewers were on Marie's side and felt this could slip into California's anti-coercion laws.
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
@melissaannmariee/TikTok
It's understandable that the kitchen designer is trying to grow their business in their community, and working with social media influencers and other people in the public eye could potentially create a huge boost in their business.
But there are right and wrong ways to gain publicity and grow as a business. Coercing someone into sharing their private property and the location of their home definitely lands on the "wrong" side of doing business.
