Saw some negative comments here, so just wanted to say that IMO this is very well though-out poignant and generous. Especially how you empathize with these creators, which is MUCH more than what average tik tok users grant to large influencers. Some comments here make me think about how our generation seems to have a really hard time parsing out thoughtful critique from cyber-bullying, feedback, cancellation, etc. Not saying that these are easy distinctions, but anyone that's gone viral on Tik Tok (as I have, somewhat unfortunately) knows that one of the primary experiences is being misunderstood and misrepresented. I think Tik Tok and Twitter are powerful vehicles for decontextualizing content. And I feel like that's spilling into "the real world" and *the discourse*. Also, I have a Substack called Gen Zero, and we talk about similar things re: our generational culture! Congrats on the piece woo
Hmmmmm... some of this is accurate and some not so much. As an avid millennial tiktok user I (of course) have some thoughts.
1. The rise of Bella Poarch was accompanied by MANY Gen Z detractors who stitched THAT famous video with evidence that she is an industry plant. Some pointed out that she shot all her videos in a hotel room, that the algo was definitely being manipulated in her favor and other strange phenomena that didn’t add up. They knew her rise was NOT organic and called it from day 1.
2. Doja Cat blew up with Mooo!. A ridiculous YouTube video that went viral in 2018 before tiktoks domination. Megan blew up after releasing multiple mixtapes and grinding the old fashioned way.
3. While there is a lot of mediocrity on tiktok, as on any other platform, there are also countless thoughtful creators from all age groups sharing interesting and sometimes mind blowing content. Juilliard students sharing their practices with us, amazing life hacks, historians breaking down history from under represented POVs and so forth. This has spawned the in-platform joke “Tiktok university”
I agree with most of this! Although I question whether Bella Poarch's rise is actually manipulated just because I've never seen hard evidence of that, hotel conspiracy aside (she was traveling in the Navy, after all). And I meant that Doja Cat was popularized because of Say So, but of course I was a Mooooo fan too.
Completely, 100% agree with the bounty of incredible creators there are on TikTok. I use it for recipe & workout inspiration, comedy, cleaning hacks, mindless entertainment, and everything in between.
Echoing all the other comments here: this is so thoughtful and nuanced, and what really makes it sing is the fact that you actually know TikTok. (I feel like almost every other reporter besides you and Taylor just parachutes in when it’s time to do a story.) Excited to read more 💗
This article put everything I’ve been ranting about white mediocrity into concrete words, thanks! I never wanted to come across as “mean” to Charli, but you’re right: there’s nothing special about her, yet we’re all subjected to seeing her in the news constantly. No hate, just what does a 16 year old white girl have to say/do that’s worthy of billions of dollars and invaluable connections?
Also: just because the comment critiquing you is annoying me: do they know that Bella Poarch is in her mid 20s and even served in the Navy? Not to mention had an extremely racist japanese imperialist tattoo, most likely placed there because she liked the “Japanese aesthetic” and likely didn’t do any research on why the rising sun is controversial. Very much not bullying a young teenager or whatever. I think you can criticize a 16 year old white girl for the massive heaps of success for doing virtually nothing and it wouldn’t be bullying. 🤷♀️ Just another way conventionally attractive white people coast through life.
Yeah I hate when people accuse me of going after young people who are actually older than me, haha. But I agree, this column idea was sparked by a friend referring to the D'Amelios as the peak of white mediocrity. Conventionally attractive white and white-passing people ARE allowed to coast in a lot of ways, otherwise there would be a Black influencer who gets the same treatment. And there just isn't one.
This is so thought-out, thank you for posting. I do get a feeling that we've overcorrected with "poptism" to the point where now not only do we not criticize what's popular, but we interpret it as inherently good BECAUSE it's popular.
This is so well nuanced and thoughtful- you walk the line incredibly well, which is such a special and empathetic talent when discussing subjects that are so young. Keep up the great work!!
This article does indeed sound like invasive jealousy and bullying. Some examples below.
About Charli “All of it — is incredibly boring and one-dimensional.” Your article says the bullying of Charli is tragic, but also you call her “incredibly boring.” If someone wrote “Kat’s writing - all of it - is incredibly boring and derivative.” It doesn’t then make it somehow better to follow it with “This isn’t meant to bash Kat, who I feel great sympathy for given she’s a mediocre, inexperienced writer who gained fame through plagiarism and clout chasing.” Just be honest, you’re still bullying Charli. Others may not have her best interest at heart either, but I’m not feeling that you do.
About Bella “She’s extremely pretty in a very social media-specific way, particularly due to her pouty lips, excessive blush, highlighted button nose, and glow-y skin.” Yuk. Imagine someone calling somebody you love pretty in a “very social media specific way.” You describe yourself as not being mean or jealous.... but it’s, uh, a mean thing to say about someone.
About Charli: “What we have is tragic.... Now Charli gets relentlessly bullied for being rich and so-called “talentless” when all she wanted to do was have fun and be 15.” Can you explain how it's tragic that she's bullied for being ‘talentless’ but you calling her ‘oppressively average’ shows you feeling bad for her? Really. Really. Can you look in a mirror and say you feel bad for Charli?
About Brittany Broski: “Kombucha girl,” is overall more beloved, funnier, and less controversial than Charli.” What does that mean she’s more beloved? That part is less jealousy and more… what? What are you talking about?
My take -- I feel bad for you, but in a different way than how you feel bad for Charli. You’re just learning to write, you’ve decided to make a career out of picking easy targets (young influencers), and in the process you’re bullying a bunch of teenagers while pretending you care for them. Still hard to tell if you’re pretending to just your readers, or to yourself as well.
Interesting critique! If I HAD plagiarized I think it would be fair to say those things about me, but these are my original thoughts!
I'm not sure you can justify calling someone boring "bullying." If I say a song is boring, am I bullying the artist? Content is art, it's open to critique. I'm calling Charli's content boring, not her as a person. I don't know her. It's hard to draw those lines because influencers are selling themselves — and perhaps I should be clearer about this — but I'm talking about Charli's online persona, not how she is in real life.
In response to your thoughts on how I described Bella... Beauty and social media have collided in the form of new trends and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out or criticizing it or emulating it. I do all three.
Overall I think you veer a little too far into personal territory with this response, but that's okay. I'm open to it. I'm not pretending with any of this, it is genuinely how I feel. If you want to be my therapist, that job is already taken, but I don't question my empathy for these teens. I have met many of them, I like them, I buy their products, and I watch their content. Sure, I'm critiquing them, but that doesn't mean I have hate or jealousy in my heart. I'm just a normal person who forms opinions.
If I may, I'm starting to notice a cultural rift affecting criticism. I suspect that for Gen Z the line between Criticism (the literary genre) and personal attacks has been nearly annihilated. I first noticed it after the backlash to the reviewer who called Post Malone "King Dorito," however that's probably a bad example because that review was in fact hilarious, biased, and mean. A better example would be when cultural analysis YouTubers experience backlash for presenting facts about a celebrity in a mostly neutral manner, because fans can experience content that isn't explicitly positive as a threat to their parasocial relationship with the celebrity.
I guess I'll try and answer the one question in your response Kat.
"If I say a song is boring, am I bullying the artist?"
I would say nope, it's not. But you weren't saying her song or dancing or content is boring. You were saying in interviews Charli is boring and has nothing to say. That's calling her as a person boring, not her art boring. And not just boring but "incredibly boring" and "invasive mediocrity". And she's only 16 years old.
This isn't personal against Kat the writer so much as personal in defense of people like Charli. She does something really well (dance), but then get critiqued that she doesn't "deserve" her fame because while people love to watch her dance, she is... boring in interviews? Has nothing to say?
If as you (Kat) get mesmerized by Charli's tik toks...and so have 100Ms of other people... why doesn't she deserve her millions of dollars? I just don't follow it. People love watching her dance, can that be enough?
Re: critique of Bella's nose -- apologies there. I thought you were criticizing her body/face but now see a button nose is a make-up technique not a critique of her face etc. Still feels weird to pick apart and categorize young girls looks, but sure go for it.
I do think you're jealous and a mediocre writer, I have no idea if you have hate in your heart. If you are genuinely "really sad" that Charli isn't enjoying this any more, I don't know, don't call her invasively mediocre. It's just not that a far leap from the people calling her talentless that make you so sad.
I feel like we ultimately agree on a lot of the principles behind what I'm saying, that youth should be protected and held to a sympathetic standard. We're mostly disagreeing with the way I phrased it and presented it, which is completely welcome. I'm trying to argue that Charli shouldn't be doing these interviews at all, because what are they for? They're for the entertainment conglomerate her family is building around her that has nothing to do with her dancing or her wellbeing and is, in my opinion, transparently exploitative.
At this point, Charli is doing reality TV, she's an author, she's a podcast host — all this stuff that has nothing to do with her dancing. I'm arguing that this media persona they've tried to force on her has resulted in something mediocre and unnecessary. I do definitely see how that comes across as cruel, but I don't think being called boring in interviews is the worst thing you can hear. I am definitely not trying to hurt anyone, but I respect your critique in that regard.
"Invasively mediocre" is meant to be about the entire TikTok star power phenomenon, not Charli specifically. If I'm calling someone mediocre, it's only fair to get called mediocre back, but I don't think I'm that jealous of the TikTok stars. I actually wouldn't wish young fame on anyone, I've seen too much of the darkness that comes along with it. I used to want to be famous as a kid, sure, but I'm really glad I wasn't. Pardon my French but I think it fucks you up.
Also: re: me critiquing young girls' looks... Bella is, for the record, older than me. I know it's tricky territory to go after appearances but I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying it fits a certain online trend that sells.
Appreciate the thoughtful response. Though this reminds me of when they did that Britney doc to protect her and then she was like "What? No... this is the whole problem, I don't want to be picked apart like this." If in your mind "Charli shouldn't be doing these interviews at all" how does that square with needing to interview influencers as part of your job? Are you OK with the dozens of Business Insider interviews with creators asking how much they make and for their perspectives? Isn't Business Insider a big part of the machine exploiting teen creators if a dancer shouldn't even be interviewed?How is a line like this about the D'Amelios holding them to a 'sympathetic standard' - "There’s nothing wrong with either of them, they’re just oppressively average. And by the way, so are all their friends in the Hype House and Sway House." While Samantha below believes attractive white people coast through life, I think we are in agreement Charli is being treated unfairly and isn't really coasting through anything. There is something special about her - she's excellent at dancing. There are deeper reasons her success makes people so angry, but it's a shame so much criticism gets thrown at her as a result.
Well, for one thing, I don't think you can paint influencers with a broad brush. Most of the people Business Insider interviews are adults, and those creator newsletter interviews revolve around how people monetize their content online. We're not plucking out random teens to do celebrity cover stories. Most creators in 2021 aren't celebrities at all, they're a new upper middle-class population of individuals in the gig economy.
Charli is a very special case, different from even Addison, I would say. She's not being interviewed about being a good dancer, she's being held up as a blank-slate relatable personality that can sell anything — a mattress, a makeup line, a pair of jeans, a Hulu show. She's become less of an artist than a walking billboard. Most creators aren't like that. And that machine is the D'Amelio Family Enterprises, not any given publication or even TikTok. So when I say they're "oppressively average," I mean they're pure capitalism.
Rebecca Jennings put it this way, which I really like: "[...] what we’re seeing is the lowest common denominator of what human beings want to look at, appealing to our most base impulses and exploiting existing biases toward thinness, whiteness, and wealth."
It's not Charli's fault nor should she be unduly criticized for being an average white girl. I think I'm also an average white girl. "Average" and "boring" don't have to be hard-hitting insults. It's just what most people are. I think the vast majority of criticism against Charli is mean-spirited, unfair, and lacks nuance. In this piece I'm attempting to show why that criticism has developed, but this was an unedited off-the-cuff column, so I made some generalizations that don't actually apply to every single person along the way.
That's valid. I guess to me calling Charli "oppressively average" is no different than someone else calling her talentless. Both somewhere maybe shy of hard-hitting, but certainly not sympathetic. If you are concerned about criticism lacking nuance, then I think it's worth editing your column before publishing it. To me finding so many ways to call people boring and mediocre, but then framing it as "no, I mean people are supposed to be mediocre, I'm mediocre too!" is a playground trick. Appreciate that you're willing to reply in the comment section here.
Saw some negative comments here, so just wanted to say that IMO this is very well though-out poignant and generous. Especially how you empathize with these creators, which is MUCH more than what average tik tok users grant to large influencers. Some comments here make me think about how our generation seems to have a really hard time parsing out thoughtful critique from cyber-bullying, feedback, cancellation, etc. Not saying that these are easy distinctions, but anyone that's gone viral on Tik Tok (as I have, somewhat unfortunately) knows that one of the primary experiences is being misunderstood and misrepresented. I think Tik Tok and Twitter are powerful vehicles for decontextualizing content. And I feel like that's spilling into "the real world" and *the discourse*. Also, I have a Substack called Gen Zero, and we talk about similar things re: our generational culture! Congrats on the piece woo
Thank you so much Tobias!! Subscribing to you now!!
Hmmmmm... some of this is accurate and some not so much. As an avid millennial tiktok user I (of course) have some thoughts.
1. The rise of Bella Poarch was accompanied by MANY Gen Z detractors who stitched THAT famous video with evidence that she is an industry plant. Some pointed out that she shot all her videos in a hotel room, that the algo was definitely being manipulated in her favor and other strange phenomena that didn’t add up. They knew her rise was NOT organic and called it from day 1.
2. Doja Cat blew up with Mooo!. A ridiculous YouTube video that went viral in 2018 before tiktoks domination. Megan blew up after releasing multiple mixtapes and grinding the old fashioned way.
3. While there is a lot of mediocrity on tiktok, as on any other platform, there are also countless thoughtful creators from all age groups sharing interesting and sometimes mind blowing content. Juilliard students sharing their practices with us, amazing life hacks, historians breaking down history from under represented POVs and so forth. This has spawned the in-platform joke “Tiktok university”
4. Spot on about Charli and Addison though!
I agree with most of this! Although I question whether Bella Poarch's rise is actually manipulated just because I've never seen hard evidence of that, hotel conspiracy aside (she was traveling in the Navy, after all). And I meant that Doja Cat was popularized because of Say So, but of course I was a Mooooo fan too.
Completely, 100% agree with the bounty of incredible creators there are on TikTok. I use it for recipe & workout inspiration, comedy, cleaning hacks, mindless entertainment, and everything in between.
Echoing all the other comments here: this is so thoughtful and nuanced, and what really makes it sing is the fact that you actually know TikTok. (I feel like almost every other reporter besides you and Taylor just parachutes in when it’s time to do a story.) Excited to read more 💗
Thank you so much!!! I've lost so many hours to TikTok, but it's all worth it.
This article put everything I’ve been ranting about white mediocrity into concrete words, thanks! I never wanted to come across as “mean” to Charli, but you’re right: there’s nothing special about her, yet we’re all subjected to seeing her in the news constantly. No hate, just what does a 16 year old white girl have to say/do that’s worthy of billions of dollars and invaluable connections?
Also: just because the comment critiquing you is annoying me: do they know that Bella Poarch is in her mid 20s and even served in the Navy? Not to mention had an extremely racist japanese imperialist tattoo, most likely placed there because she liked the “Japanese aesthetic” and likely didn’t do any research on why the rising sun is controversial. Very much not bullying a young teenager or whatever. I think you can criticize a 16 year old white girl for the massive heaps of success for doing virtually nothing and it wouldn’t be bullying. 🤷♀️ Just another way conventionally attractive white people coast through life.
Yeah I hate when people accuse me of going after young people who are actually older than me, haha. But I agree, this column idea was sparked by a friend referring to the D'Amelios as the peak of white mediocrity. Conventionally attractive white and white-passing people ARE allowed to coast in a lot of ways, otherwise there would be a Black influencer who gets the same treatment. And there just isn't one.
This is so thought-out, thank you for posting. I do get a feeling that we've overcorrected with "poptism" to the point where now not only do we not criticize what's popular, but we interpret it as inherently good BECAUSE it's popular.
Great article!
I would like to note, though, that Broski (rightfully) was criticized for stating that AAVE is “Gen Z Language”. So she’s not without controversy.
Definitely agree!!
This is so well nuanced and thoughtful- you walk the line incredibly well, which is such a special and empathetic talent when discussing subjects that are so young. Keep up the great work!!
Thank you so much!!
This is great!
Thanks Mark!
You killed this! I’m subscribing.
This article does indeed sound like invasive jealousy and bullying. Some examples below.
About Charli “All of it — is incredibly boring and one-dimensional.” Your article says the bullying of Charli is tragic, but also you call her “incredibly boring.” If someone wrote “Kat’s writing - all of it - is incredibly boring and derivative.” It doesn’t then make it somehow better to follow it with “This isn’t meant to bash Kat, who I feel great sympathy for given she’s a mediocre, inexperienced writer who gained fame through plagiarism and clout chasing.” Just be honest, you’re still bullying Charli. Others may not have her best interest at heart either, but I’m not feeling that you do.
About Bella “She’s extremely pretty in a very social media-specific way, particularly due to her pouty lips, excessive blush, highlighted button nose, and glow-y skin.” Yuk. Imagine someone calling somebody you love pretty in a “very social media specific way.” You describe yourself as not being mean or jealous.... but it’s, uh, a mean thing to say about someone.
About Charli: “What we have is tragic.... Now Charli gets relentlessly bullied for being rich and so-called “talentless” when all she wanted to do was have fun and be 15.” Can you explain how it's tragic that she's bullied for being ‘talentless’ but you calling her ‘oppressively average’ shows you feeling bad for her? Really. Really. Can you look in a mirror and say you feel bad for Charli?
About Brittany Broski: “Kombucha girl,” is overall more beloved, funnier, and less controversial than Charli.” What does that mean she’s more beloved? That part is less jealousy and more… what? What are you talking about?
My take -- I feel bad for you, but in a different way than how you feel bad for Charli. You’re just learning to write, you’ve decided to make a career out of picking easy targets (young influencers), and in the process you’re bullying a bunch of teenagers while pretending you care for them. Still hard to tell if you’re pretending to just your readers, or to yourself as well.
Interesting critique! If I HAD plagiarized I think it would be fair to say those things about me, but these are my original thoughts!
I'm not sure you can justify calling someone boring "bullying." If I say a song is boring, am I bullying the artist? Content is art, it's open to critique. I'm calling Charli's content boring, not her as a person. I don't know her. It's hard to draw those lines because influencers are selling themselves — and perhaps I should be clearer about this — but I'm talking about Charli's online persona, not how she is in real life.
In response to your thoughts on how I described Bella... Beauty and social media have collided in the form of new trends and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out or criticizing it or emulating it. I do all three.
Overall I think you veer a little too far into personal territory with this response, but that's okay. I'm open to it. I'm not pretending with any of this, it is genuinely how I feel. If you want to be my therapist, that job is already taken, but I don't question my empathy for these teens. I have met many of them, I like them, I buy their products, and I watch their content. Sure, I'm critiquing them, but that doesn't mean I have hate or jealousy in my heart. I'm just a normal person who forms opinions.
Thanks for reading!
If I may, I'm starting to notice a cultural rift affecting criticism. I suspect that for Gen Z the line between Criticism (the literary genre) and personal attacks has been nearly annihilated. I first noticed it after the backlash to the reviewer who called Post Malone "King Dorito," however that's probably a bad example because that review was in fact hilarious, biased, and mean. A better example would be when cultural analysis YouTubers experience backlash for presenting facts about a celebrity in a mostly neutral manner, because fans can experience content that isn't explicitly positive as a threat to their parasocial relationship with the celebrity.
I guess I'll try and answer the one question in your response Kat.
"If I say a song is boring, am I bullying the artist?"
I would say nope, it's not. But you weren't saying her song or dancing or content is boring. You were saying in interviews Charli is boring and has nothing to say. That's calling her as a person boring, not her art boring. And not just boring but "incredibly boring" and "invasive mediocrity". And she's only 16 years old.
This isn't personal against Kat the writer so much as personal in defense of people like Charli. She does something really well (dance), but then get critiqued that she doesn't "deserve" her fame because while people love to watch her dance, she is... boring in interviews? Has nothing to say?
If as you (Kat) get mesmerized by Charli's tik toks...and so have 100Ms of other people... why doesn't she deserve her millions of dollars? I just don't follow it. People love watching her dance, can that be enough?
Re: critique of Bella's nose -- apologies there. I thought you were criticizing her body/face but now see a button nose is a make-up technique not a critique of her face etc. Still feels weird to pick apart and categorize young girls looks, but sure go for it.
I do think you're jealous and a mediocre writer, I have no idea if you have hate in your heart. If you are genuinely "really sad" that Charli isn't enjoying this any more, I don't know, don't call her invasively mediocre. It's just not that a far leap from the people calling her talentless that make you so sad.
I feel like we ultimately agree on a lot of the principles behind what I'm saying, that youth should be protected and held to a sympathetic standard. We're mostly disagreeing with the way I phrased it and presented it, which is completely welcome. I'm trying to argue that Charli shouldn't be doing these interviews at all, because what are they for? They're for the entertainment conglomerate her family is building around her that has nothing to do with her dancing or her wellbeing and is, in my opinion, transparently exploitative.
At this point, Charli is doing reality TV, she's an author, she's a podcast host — all this stuff that has nothing to do with her dancing. I'm arguing that this media persona they've tried to force on her has resulted in something mediocre and unnecessary. I do definitely see how that comes across as cruel, but I don't think being called boring in interviews is the worst thing you can hear. I am definitely not trying to hurt anyone, but I respect your critique in that regard.
"Invasively mediocre" is meant to be about the entire TikTok star power phenomenon, not Charli specifically. If I'm calling someone mediocre, it's only fair to get called mediocre back, but I don't think I'm that jealous of the TikTok stars. I actually wouldn't wish young fame on anyone, I've seen too much of the darkness that comes along with it. I used to want to be famous as a kid, sure, but I'm really glad I wasn't. Pardon my French but I think it fucks you up.
Also: re: me critiquing young girls' looks... Bella is, for the record, older than me. I know it's tricky territory to go after appearances but I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just saying it fits a certain online trend that sells.
Appreciate the thoughtful response. Though this reminds me of when they did that Britney doc to protect her and then she was like "What? No... this is the whole problem, I don't want to be picked apart like this." If in your mind "Charli shouldn't be doing these interviews at all" how does that square with needing to interview influencers as part of your job? Are you OK with the dozens of Business Insider interviews with creators asking how much they make and for their perspectives? Isn't Business Insider a big part of the machine exploiting teen creators if a dancer shouldn't even be interviewed?How is a line like this about the D'Amelios holding them to a 'sympathetic standard' - "There’s nothing wrong with either of them, they’re just oppressively average. And by the way, so are all their friends in the Hype House and Sway House." While Samantha below believes attractive white people coast through life, I think we are in agreement Charli is being treated unfairly and isn't really coasting through anything. There is something special about her - she's excellent at dancing. There are deeper reasons her success makes people so angry, but it's a shame so much criticism gets thrown at her as a result.
Well, for one thing, I don't think you can paint influencers with a broad brush. Most of the people Business Insider interviews are adults, and those creator newsletter interviews revolve around how people monetize their content online. We're not plucking out random teens to do celebrity cover stories. Most creators in 2021 aren't celebrities at all, they're a new upper middle-class population of individuals in the gig economy.
Charli is a very special case, different from even Addison, I would say. She's not being interviewed about being a good dancer, she's being held up as a blank-slate relatable personality that can sell anything — a mattress, a makeup line, a pair of jeans, a Hulu show. She's become less of an artist than a walking billboard. Most creators aren't like that. And that machine is the D'Amelio Family Enterprises, not any given publication or even TikTok. So when I say they're "oppressively average," I mean they're pure capitalism.
Rebecca Jennings put it this way, which I really like: "[...] what we’re seeing is the lowest common denominator of what human beings want to look at, appealing to our most base impulses and exploiting existing biases toward thinness, whiteness, and wealth."
It's not Charli's fault nor should she be unduly criticized for being an average white girl. I think I'm also an average white girl. "Average" and "boring" don't have to be hard-hitting insults. It's just what most people are. I think the vast majority of criticism against Charli is mean-spirited, unfair, and lacks nuance. In this piece I'm attempting to show why that criticism has developed, but this was an unedited off-the-cuff column, so I made some generalizations that don't actually apply to every single person along the way.
That's valid. I guess to me calling Charli "oppressively average" is no different than someone else calling her talentless. Both somewhere maybe shy of hard-hitting, but certainly not sympathetic. If you are concerned about criticism lacking nuance, then I think it's worth editing your column before publishing it. To me finding so many ways to call people boring and mediocre, but then framing it as "no, I mean people are supposed to be mediocre, I'm mediocre too!" is a playground trick. Appreciate that you're willing to reply in the comment section here.
Nailed that shit. 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
wow great article. I’ve honestly been waiting for someone like you to give thoughtful insight on these new age celebrities.
This is so good it makes me jealous! Subscribing for more of this high-quality cultural analysis :)
First read, nicely done. Really great insight. Looking forward to more.
such a well written piece! You never fail to amaze me! Keep up the great work kat!!!!
Another great article, Kat!! Thank you!