A wave of accusations has surfaced against television personality Binky Felstead, alleging a pattern of requesting free services from businesses in exchange for social media exposure. The claims paint a picture of leveraging her online presence to avoid financial obligations, sparking debate about the ethics of “exposure” as payment.
The initial outcry came from Reshmi Bennett, owner of the London-based luxury cake business Anges de Sucre. Bennett shared screenshots revealing Binky’s team offered only social media promotion for a custom cake for her son’s third birthday, a proposition she found deeply unsatisfactory.
The situation escalated as other creatives came forward with similar stories. Illustrator Alice Peto revealed she was approached to design Binky’s wedding invitations and menus entirely for free, a request she firmly declined. Peto, a seasoned artist with high-profile clients, valued her expertise and refused to work for mere “exposure.”
The requests weren’t limited to birthdays and smaller events. Binky’s team allegedly sought complimentary design work for her lavish wedding celebrations, which included both a civil ceremony and a destination event in Greece, extensively documented online. Despite showcasing the work of various vendors, she labeled the posts as recommendations, not advertisements.
Another bakery, Funfetti London, found themselves in a frustrating pursuit of a meager £75 payment for two cakes. After delivering the goods, they were met with silence, a “tumbleweed” response that left them feeling undervalued and exploited. The owner admitted to being “younger and naïve” when initially agreeing to the arrangement.
The core of the issue lies in the imbalance of power. While Binky Felstead boasts a substantial social media following – around 1.4 million – the value of that exposure doesn’t necessarily translate into financial stability for small businesses and independent artists. The “exposure economy” often places an unfair burden on creatives.
A representative for Binky responded, characterizing the requests as “standard contra enquiries” and emphasizing that Binky herself wasn’t directly involved in the email exchanges. They acknowledged that such collaborations aren’t universally appealing and expressed disappointment at the public sharing of private communications.
However, the response did little to quell the growing criticism. Reshmi Bennett argued that the entire situation could have been avoided with a simple payment for the cake, a practice she noted is surprisingly rare among influencers. She felt compelled to speak out to protect other businesses from similar requests.
The incident highlights a wider trend within the influencer world, where the expectation of free goods and services in exchange for promotion is becoming increasingly common. It raises questions about the responsibility of those with large platforms and the need for fair compensation for creative work.
The baker from Funfetti London revealed she even traveled to Binky’s home to assemble a wedding cake in her kitchen, taking an unpaid day off work and placing her trust in a promise that ultimately went unfulfilled. The unpaid invoice remains a stark reminder of the potential pitfalls of accepting “exposure” as payment.
