How to recognize shaming, "personal style" click bait on Substack

Here's a 10-point guide. Paywall removed.

I’ve seen it on IG. And now I’m seeing it here. But I’ve also learned to recognize it for what it is rather than giving it more hearts, shares, clicks and credence. So I made you a guide for spotting the click bait in case you’d like to do the same.

It’s scary out there. (I’m talking about you, Notes!) Be on alert.

1. Controversial, mean spirited headline. Look, we all want to write headlines that capture attention. Sometimes I rewrite mine even after I’ve published! We want our readers to be excited, and yes, we want to be read. It’s fine to be provocative, but you wouldn’t accept, say, racism in a headline. How about ageism? In the name of clicks? How about just — assholery? Provocation yes, judgment no, is my take. I also feel much more ok when the headline is posing a question versus coming across like an assertion, which rings my yuck bell.

2. Strange semi backtracking. That headline is often followed by something like “This may sound harsh, but” — this is how you know it’s knowing. Not accidental.

3. False “authority” positioning. They’re not asking questions or letting you know it’s personal opinion, and they’re not citing any sources. I understand that everything we write here can be our own opinion or personal experience. But — “Having a great sense of style isn’t about X. It’s about Y” — I have to say, statements like these make me want to ask: Who made you judge and jury? Or at least say, Yeesh. K.

4. Speaking in absolutes about something that’s an opinion. Ancillary to the above. Anyone who’s ever had couples counseling (HAND RAISED EMOJI) knows absolutes or implied absolutes — “you never” “it always” “no one who” “everyone who” — make real discourse or depth a challenge. Statements like sometimes compensate for lack of depth, knowledge, empathy and openness.

5. AI vibes. More and more in my daily work life, I’m seeing people use AI to “write.” I get the appeal. Of course. But you start to suss it out. It’s all sort of — soulless, unattributed, generic, and … fluffy. The humanity is missing. Now look at this opener from

   Grace Atwood
   by comparison, right down to the ! after the “So”:

You probably know this by now, but I love (LOVE) a bath. I probably have one at least three nights a week. For me, bathing and showering serve two very different purposes. A shower is to get clean; the bath is for relaxing. Recently, a reader asked me about my favorite baths. My hunch was to say, "Go to the blog!" But then I went to the blog and quickly realized that it had been a long time since I'd done a bath edit. Oops.

So! Here are my top eleven favorites. I tried to keep it to ten, but Flewd has two different soaks that I really like. I broke them down by category, but some of them fit multiple criteria.

See what I mean? So much humanity. So much credibility. So much there there, yes, even on the topic of bath soaks.

6. Self interest. Clickbait is trying to get you … to click. So the baiter gets paid. Before you like, heart, share even a hot take you vaguely agree with, take a look at where this person is coming from. Someone’s saying that “anyone who wears a Cartier Love bracelet is a fashion victim” and they’re in jewelry sales, selling expensive, largely unbranded pieces. Or they’re telling you buying into trends means you don’t have personal style — and they’re making income as an online seller of vintage-only? Understand the source.

7. Preaching, not practicing. Then there are the ones (often the same ones!) speaking in absolutes while not practicing what they preach themselves. Telling you quality isn’t about designer brands while exclusively wearing them. Or selling them. Or isn’t about following trends - while very much following them. Often one look at a profile picture makes it clear. And then it feels disingenuous and for some other purpose.

8. Requisite CBK worship. If I had a dollar for every judgey post citing Carolyn Bessette Kennedy’s “timeless personal style” I’d have so many dollars! … CBK is a right-now icon with massive, widespread appeal and a surefire way to drive clicks. And is it just me — I don’t think of her as being timeless or necessarily a “personal style” icon. I think of her as very aware of trends, very participatory in of-the-moment 90s-specific style, and I think of our assessment as influenced by many things other than what she wore. But that’s just an opinion. So I sought out two of the foremost experts I know.

   1. London-based fashion editor, Navaz Batliwalla, writer of Disneyrollergirl, the go-to resource for fashion and beauty industry insights, emerging trends and editorial shoots from an industry insider’s point of view, who is also the author of Face Values and my BELOVED The New Garconne: How to Be a Modern Gentlewoman: “It's a specific privileged style and beauty yet it’s also tinged with the romance of her (and her husband’s) untimely demise which adds an extra layer of mystique … as with most great style ‘icons’, the thing that makes her so OF her time AND timeless, are her conviction in what she wore. They look like her clothes, she looks comfortable in them (or ‘effortless’ if you will) meaning she inhabits her outfits with a sureness that isn’t quite so convincing in others of her era. As you say, her time is now because that specific clean, understated 90s look is current. She worked in fashion, for Calvin Klein, so had early access to that influential arty-minimal look before we knew how important it would go on to be. Nobody was talking about her ‘classic, timeless’ look during 2010 for example because the look of the time was a different - overt, bodycon - one. So, yes, we can say she’s a classic-leaning style icon, but only if we acknowledge it’s within the lens of a narrow time and aesthetic frame. Outside of that time frame, she’s visibly dated.”

   2. Julian Randall, prolific fashion journalist and scholar, Ph.D. Candidate: “I do appreciate her style and how she made designer sort of fade into the background, in a way. But in all honesty, I think people love a bit of that but also that her style is imitable. Easily. Cos and the Row alike can get you the look. She’s also much easier to emulate than Jackie. But the best part about Carolyn’s style was intangible for me, which I think people are missing.

      Like

      Jalil Johnson
      draws lots of inspiration from people like her but it’s still him, you know? He gets style in a more comprehensive sense.” (p.s. If you haven’t already, don’t miss reading
      Julian Randall
      ’s recent piece on Tibi for Essence.)

9. You vs. we. Is the person asserting themselves as above reproach while telling you what your failings are? The typical clickbait uses the second person to jab at you from a position of suggested “authority.” “8 Things You Need to Do Before Proposing” “This Is Why You’re Not Seeing an ROI on Your Marketing” “Did You Know That Influencer Marketing is Dying?” I give much more credence to personal, heartfelt content on Substack that uses the first person and admits the author’s own uncertainties and/or conveys their real experiences. When I try to call readers in with “you” - I quickly move to we and am honest about my own struggles.

10. Weird adherence to the idea old is always better than new. I say weird, because I’ve seen this in a very genuine, informed way about the quality of clothing. But I’ve more often seen it in ways that feel put on. Like by someone wearing Margiela Tabi flats while sounding almost like a Jackie Kennedy era re-enactor. I give to Docomomo, which supports the preservation and celebration of modernist architecture, technically 1930s-1970s. But the participants also love and respect great work happening right now. I think it’s more nuanced to keep one’s mind open and allow the possibility of new ideas.

The origin of this piece, in case you’re interested

I don’t want to shame someone by calling them out by name. But there was a headline I read recently; I’m redacting here, said Why X People Have No Sense of Style. When last I looked, it had 1259 likes.

And it brought me back to this one, too:

Do I sound annoyed? I’m annoyed. (Please don’t say “triggered” - which is a clinical word to refer to someone confronting behavior that harks back to a very real past pain and is used casually, often toward women, to minimize valid feelings.)

I am annoyed by women coming for each other, in ways big and small, and in places of support and escape like style/fashion Substack, for self-serving reasons, when we are under attack right now and have bigger sh*t to deal with.

I’m not going to take the bait and follow along.

XO,

Rachel