Week 2 blog - Deinfluencing: Is the end nigh for beauty influencers?

Week 2 blog - Deinfluencing: Is the end nigh for beauty influencers?

Deinfluencing: Is the end nigh for beauty influencers? | Dazed

The article discusses how beauty influencers, who used to be the authoritative voices promoting must-have products and perfect tutorials, are now focusing their cameras and algorithms on what not to buy. This is now called “deinfluencing”. This appears to be a new change.

This article begins with a clear explanation of the trend. Instead of showcasing highlighters and new palettes, some creators are now filming videos where they say “don’t buy this” or “skip that”. During the cost-of-living crisis, many consumers are growing tired of seeing influencers promote products that exceed the cost of basic necessities. The article suggests that the root of deinfluencing lies in a mix of consumer pushback and influencer fatigue. People are tired of being told what they must own, and influencers are tired of being treated like walking billboards.

A key point that the article talks about is what’s known as “MascaraGate.” A popular TikTok beauty influencer reviewed a mascara in a sponsored post, only to be accused of wearing false eyelashes while saying the effect came from the product itself. This was seen as a symbol of a bigger trust crisis. When consumers believe influencers aren’t being honest, the base of “influence” begins to break. The article talks about how the fallout wasn’t just reputational.

The article argues that we are be witnessing not just a change in influencer behaviour, but the possible problem of the “beauty influencer industrial complex”. The market is oversaturated, consumers are sceptical, and now influencers themselves are changing their tone. From “buy this” to “don’t buy that”. But that doesn’t make it more honest. Deinfluencing is still positioning itself as your guide, still prompting you toward choice, it’s just shown differently.

The article mentions research indicating that negative or critical reviews receive more engagement than positive ones. This is because viewers now assume that product approvals are sponsored. When someone says, “This didn’t work for me”, that feels more trustworthy. The article doesn’t agree with that because it says that negative content can be just as monetised as positive content, with influencers sometimes paid to put down other competitor brands.

The influencer era is not ending but it is evolving. Brands, creators and consumers are all shifting their expectations. For creators, being “anti-hype” becomes a way to stand out in a crowded space. For consumers, the power dynamic changes. They will not only praise the good they do but also critique when something needs changing.

Overall, this Dazed article shows how the beauty industry is at a crossroads. The growth of influencer culture is showing signs of strain. The rise of deinfluencing may be less about rejecting influencers and more about evolution, “buy this to look like me” to “this didn’t work for me, maybe this will”. These changes could end beauty influencers in their current form. The audience has gained more power, which could be the change the beauty industry needs.

 

Group discussion

The group discussed the article and its issues, focusing on how sales targets and KPIS in retail can drive overconsumption. At beauty counters, employees are briefed on product sales and targets at the start of their shifts, which can pressure staff to persuade customers to buy unnecessary products. The group agreed that honesty and integrity are vital in the beauty industry, emphasising transparent communication and selling based on genuine needs rather than targets. They noted that overconsumption affects not only consumers but also professionals like makeup artists, who may over-purchase to keep up with trends. Social influence, especially through social media, was identified as a major reason for impulse buying, creating a “fear of missing out” and resulting in excess products. Overconsumption varies, from owning multiple versions of the same item to collecting entire ranges never used. The group discussed how brands rebrand or update packaging to attract consumers and how influencers influence habits. Dishonest reviews and overly positive sponsored content can get rid of trust, making transparency essential. The discussion decided that overconsumption stems from corporate pressures, social influences, and consumer psychology. Promoting responsible consumption and honesty is crucial for industry integrity.

Overall, the article showed the evolving influence in the beauty sector, highlighting trends like “deinfluencing” and their impact on trust and authenticity. It shows the importance of integrity and transparency in influencer culture and daily practice. The discussion shows that professionalism in beauty involves prioritising honesty, sustainability, and consumer awareness, reflecting on the industry's adaptation to social and economic changes in the digital age. 

Week 1 blog - Estee Laundry and Beauty’s second wave of accountability culture

 

Week 1 blog - Estée Laundry and Beauty’s second wave of accountability culture

Estee Laundry and beauty’s second wave of accountability culture | Dazed

The article from Dazed, "Estée Laundry and Beauty's Second Wave of Accountability Culture", arrived at a crucial moment for the beauty industry. Over the years, brands have made progress in being more inclusive, but the conversation surrounding these topics seems to have quietened. The article explored the journey of Estée Laundry, a once-anonymous Instagram account that shook the industry by calling out its numerous shortcomings.

Back in 2018, Estée Laundry made headlines by exposing the hypocrisy and unethical practices that surround the beauty world. Moving on to 2023, the account had gone silent, calling burnout and frustration with the nature of “call-out culture.” Now in 2025, Estée Laundry has returned with a fresh approach that feels more reflective and needed than ever before.

Despite progress, there has been a dip in diversity and inclusivity within the beauty industry. Foundation shades are becoming more limited and many campaigns are lacking in representation compared to previous years. Estée Laundry's return serves as a reminder that these issues are still relevant and that the demand for accountability is far from over.

Dazed shows that Estée Laundry is still one of the only independent voices that are willing to challenge and advocate for necessary changes. Without people like them, the beauty industry risks self-regulation that rarely leads to significant change.

The article shares some essential statistics: 45% of Gen Z and 50% of Millennials claim they would stop supporting brands that lack inclusivity or ethical practices. This statistic shows the importance of honesty, which is what Estée Laundry offers. By calling out negative behaviour and uplifting those who take positive steps, they help consumers to make informed, ethical choices.

Dazed isn't just sending out gossip, it is a wake-up call. The industry is at risk of relapsing at a time when diversity advocacy seems to have quieted. Watchdogs like Estée Laundry remind us that inclusivity isn’t a trend but an ongoing responsibility.

The article creates a conversation about representation and inclusivity, which in an ideal world should be a given, not a privilege. However, brands continue to fall short in areas such as diversity in shade ranges, campaign representation, and leadership diversity.

Some argue that the need for watchdogs like Estée Laundry feels outdated, claiming that the industry has improved thanks to social media and consumer awareness holding brands accountable. After all, many companies now advertise themselves as inclusive, sustainable, and ethical.

On the other hand, the piece argues that despite the public efforts and claims of progress, many hidden issues still persist. Brands often tokenise diversity rather than embracing it. Claims of sustainability are sometimes exposed as mere greenwashing. When left unchecked, companies inevitably revert to prioritising their image and profits over genuine change.

Overall group discussion

In our group discussion, we looked into the article and the challenges of inclusivity and diversity within the beauty industry. Despite social awareness, many brands still struggle to offer a big enough shade range or cater to various people. We collectively agreed that all beauty brands need to stock a full range of skin tones, from the lightest to the deepest. Brands like Fenty Beauty, Maybelline, and Haus Labs show inclusivity with their wide shade ranges, showing that catering to diverse consumers boosts both appeal and success. Many affordable brands now provide broader shade ranges compared to some high-end brands, showing that inclusivity is led by brand values more than price points.
Several brands appear to be stuck in outdated practices, offering limited product ranges that cater to a narrow audience. We pointed out Estee Lauder as a prime example of a brand that has historically targeted middle-aged white women, showing little willingness to adapt over the years. This one approach not only limits potential clientele but also distances younger consumers who are eager for representation. A few brands have taken constructive steps in response to critiques. For example, TIRTIR was initially criticised for its limited shade range but later expanded its line to include a more diverse range, showing the positive change possible when brands listen to their audience. It’s hard to see a decline in diverse representation in marketing, as many brands revert to showcasing mainly young, slim, white women with flawless skin. This lack of diversity in campaigns reinforces narrow beauty ideals, excluding many consumers. Real inclusivity should involve not only accessible products but also an accurate representation of all identities, body types, and skin tones in promotional materials. The discussion showed that embracing inclusivity and diversity should be a baseline expectation for the beauty industry. Brands that neglect these principles risk losing relevance and consumer trust, while those committed to genuine inclusiveness in both product offerings and advertising are likely to succeed. The beauty industry must align with society's progress, making sure everyone feels seen, represented, and valued. The revival of Estée Laundry shows how quickly progress can fall when the public’s focus shifts to different topics. Their commitment to thoughtful accountability, moving beyond quick judgments to meaningful dialogue about inclusive practices, aligns with what the industry desperately needs right now. Through the discussions about the article, it’s shown that brands often talk about diversity without genuinely delivering on their promises. Shade ranges are becoming shorter, and marketing is becoming less inclusive once again, despite prior advances. Inclusivity is not just about product offerings but also about visibility, respect, and the genuine feeling of being acknowledged. Real change occurs when companies heed feedback and adjust accordingly. In contrast, brands that cling to outdated practices risk their relevance in an increasingly aware and diverse market.