The increasing popularity of social media has given rise to new breeds of celebrity – the social media influencer among them. It is hard to miss social media influencers (SMIs), even – perhaps especially – during Covid-19 and the resultant lockdowns. Some provoked ire with trips to Dubai and claims to be ‘key workers’. The media storm surrounding visits to sun-kissed beaches of the Arabian Peninsula saw SMIs claiming celebrity endorsements meant they ‘had’ to be there. The resultant negative publicity demonstrates the difficulties in promoting brands without damaging their own profile or that of the endorser. Companies are investing growing sums on these online influencers, looking to reach their large followings through endorsements on YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, or whichever social media platform they use to speak to often millions of followers. Their influence is especially great among younger generations of consumers – in February, it was revealed that British American Tobacco are planning to spend £1bn on influencers to help boost sales of e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches among younger users. Global expenditure on ‘influencer marketing’ is predicted to reach $15bn by 2022, be it through traditional celebrities whose fame transcends and predates their social media presence or through SMIs, whose fame derives entirely from that presence. SMIs regularly use their platforms to promote brands to followers – sometimes in return for free samples, sometimes for free trips to exotic destinations for product launches (the Maldives, anyone?), sometimes for plain old cash. Advertorial content, brand ambassador roles, gifts and experiences all contribute to brand exposure as SMIs become prominent and influential celebrity endorsers. But as the furore around lockdown trips to Dubai demonstrates, there are risks for both parties – for their image, for their sales, for their brand. Many SMIs started out in online communities, gaining celebrity status and exhibiting significant influence over the consumption behaviours of their large following. It is when they commercialise that influence with celebrity endorsements that difficulties arise. These activities are not something they can hide. Advertising Standards Authority regulations introduced in 2015 and 2019 require SMIs to disclose paid advertorials, brand partnerships or ambassadorships, as well as the receipt of complementary or discounted products and experiences. Initial concerns surrounded the contradictions between receiving incentives and providing unbiased product recommendations. SMIs were accused of ‘selling out’, putting their own interests and that of the endorser above the interests of the community, showing a lack of loyalty to fellow community members, provoking anger and contempt. But SMIs justified their actions by explaining they provided free video content and needed to monetise their activities to continue doing so. Communities became more open to endorsements, but bound SMIs to moral responsibilities – breaches of community norms are taken to heart, a personal betrayal to the community. We studied the YouTube beauty community (YTBC), which revolves around beauty vloggers, for three years. A large number of members have become SMIs and celebrity 14 |
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTI5NzM=