Are you looking for a review of best moisturizer for your skin type? Keep in mind, there is a huge difference between reporting and reviewing.

Well… Nothing opens your eyes quite like a peek behind the curtain.

My fascination with skincare started in my late teens. By nineteen, I had a full-on product wardrobe that included piles of Yves Rocher and whatever CVS coupon gave me the biggest win in the weekend newspaper. In my twenties, I got a front-row seat to how marketing operates by working at a major beauty brand. In my thirties, I started a blog, landed on more PR lists than I can count, and contributed product roundups for other outlets.

For years, I was, and still very much am, the customer. One who Googles “best of” and considers my purchases accordingly. Over the years, I’ve read hundreds of “best skincare,” “best moisturizer,” and beauty product roundup lists while shopping for myself. I’m in my forties now and I’m here to tell you something that might ruin your afternoon: a lot of those roundups are nonsense. Not all of them, but enough that you should assume the list has an agenda until proven otherwise.

The money grab in beauty has gotten too blatant to ignore. Influencer platforms aside, I’ve watched news organizations, fashion magazines, and lifestyle retailers all launch beauty sections. Some were genuinely good. Most disappeared. The shift to affiliate revenue now dictates what gets placed in front of you online, how it’s framed, and how aggressively it’s sold.

On beauty roundups and affiliate incentives

To be clear, I’m not here to police affiliate links. I use them too. They’re a legitimate way to earn from evergreen content, especially if you’re actually doing the work and building a real library of reviews. Most importantly, if you make recommendations based on actual experience with the product in question.

What matters is the pay-for-play ecosystem that sits just beneath the surface. This isn’t exclusive to beauty. It happens everywhere. It’s not inherently wrong, but it’s easy to abuse. There’s a difference between a genuine thank-you gift and a perk designed to influence coverage. Trips, dinners, facials, experiences. You get the idea.

As someone who loves curating, it’s disheartening to hear how often product picks get assigned. Not suggested. Assigned. Because an editor went on a trip, a brand hosted an event, or someone received a treatment. The same goes for many magazine awards. I’m sorry if that ruins the fantasy, but that’s often how the cookie crumbles.

What triggered this post is something I saw online last year while searching for a moisturizer. I landed on a Wirecutter piece. Wirecutter, a The New York Times–owned product review site, positions itself as a rigorous testing operation, which should inspire confidence. But the writing felt oddly optimized, and one detail made me pause. You know what they say about things that make you go ‘hmm’…

When the details stop lining up

Their “best moisturizers” roundup lists Augustinus Bader The Rich Cream. Of course it does. And look, I like the product. I liked it enough that I struggled with a first-impressions take when it launched, then waited a couple of years before writing a dedicated post about it. It’s expensive, and I don’t think it’s responsible to recommend $300-plus skincare based on a few nights of “vibes”. I’ve received it from the brand more than once, and I’ve also bought it twice with my own money. That’s the ultimate test.

So why do I take issue with the Wirecutter blurb? Because the details aren’t factual.

The writer downplays a “big deal” about The Rich Cream allegedly containing added fragrance and suggests it’s the rare luxury pick that won’t overwhelm you with scent. There’s also a performative dig at other luxury brands that leans on a tired, internet-y reference. The whole thing reads like it was stitched together from a marketing mood board, not actual use.

And to be clear, I don’t have a problem with fragrance in skincare. I’ve said that many times before. I actually enjoy it when it’s done well. This isn’t a sensitivity issue or a moral stance. It’s a facts issue.

Here’s the problem. Augustinus Bader The Rich Cream does not contain fragrance. A quick glance at the ingredient list tells you that. And if you’ve used it consistently, like I have, you already know it’s unscented. It isn’t subtle and fresh. It’s subtle in its non-existence. The only fresh thing here is my attitude.

Now I’m curious to see how quickly Wirecutter edits that section and whether they reconsider how aggressively they push people to splurge when basic fact-checking seems optional. Apparently the budget for accuracy is the true luxury item nowadays.

I rarely get wired (no pun intended, I swear) like this but other posts that fit the mood of the above:

Affiliate disclosure: some links on this site may be affiliate links, which means I may earn a commission if you choose to purchase through them. This does not influence my opinions or what I choose to write about.