Degree Deodorant will partner with college athletes to inspire people to “break limits”

Commits $5 million over 5 years to social initiatives that keep people moving

As a company committed to building a more equitable and inclusive society, Unilever wants to set a thoughtful and positive precedent for working with college athletes as the ability to monetize college athletes’ name, image and likeness (NIL) goes into effect on July 1, 2021.

One of the key pillars of Unilever’s sustainable business strategy is to contribute to a fairer, more socially inclusive world. Unilever’s approach to working with college athletes will underscore this strategy to highlight purpose-led initiatives, amplify athlete stories and experiences, and provide equal compensation to both men’s and women’s athletes in aggregate.

“This moment represents a tremendous opportunity to set the precedent for working with college athletes in a meaningful and thoughtful way,” said Rob Master, VP of Media and Digital Engagement at Unilever NA. “It’s not just about the star players or top draft picks – we want to amplify the voices and stories of athletes across the spectrum of college sports who have dedicated their lives to their sport and inspired others through their stories.”

As part of Degree’s long-term commitment to help millions of young people transform their lives through the power of movement, Degree has committed more than $5 million over the next five years to inspire more people to move beyond their limits – the Breaking Limits program. The initiative supports those who face the biggest barriers to being active and provides them access to coaches and mentors, along with safe spaces to move. The Breaking Limits team featuring college athletes announced today represents one element of this commitment.

The Degree “Breaking Limits” team will spotlight a diverse group of college athletes from a range of sports, who are inspiring people to break limits every day. Degree will unveil the Breaking Limits team of college athletes on its Instagram page. Degree will be adding more athletes to the Breaking Limits roster throughout the year.

“Our Degree team strongly believes that movement has the power to unlock physical, mental and social benefits that can transform lives, and being able to work with extraordinary college athletes who embody this every day is something Degree and Unilever are thrilled to celebrate,” said Chiara Grillo, Senior Marketing Manager, Degree. “We now have an opportunity to further champion the stories of how college athletes have overcome personal and societal challenges and how they encourage others to keep moving to break their own limits.”

The brand will celebrate college athletes through a number of programs including funding local community projects (i.e. recreation centers, youth organizations) and content partnerships.

To contract with college athletes in a compliant manner that adheres to NIL rules and regulations governed by state law and NCAA guidelines, Unilever is working with Opendorse, the industry-leading athlete marketing platform. Opendorse, which has empowered thousands of professional athletes to receive and activate endorsement deals for over eight years, provides a compliant marketplace for brands and fans to browse thousands of athletes to book and manage NIL activities from pitch to payment in minutes, not months.

The post Unilever Launches #BreakingLimits Campaign with Degree Deodorant Featuring a Diverse Roster of College Athletes appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

“For more than a century, our industry has provided significant well-being and economic value to society,” said PCPC President and CEO Lezlee Westine as she welcomed attendees. “Together, with the millions of consumers worldwide who trust and depend on our products every day, we look forward to a shared future grounded in safety, quality, and innovation.”

Said future, however, is bound to include challenges, Westine acknowledged. In collaboration with the featured speakers, PCPC facilitated insightful conversations about the business strategies, policy changes, and guiding principles that will enable its member companies to overcome obstacles and join together in the pursuit of Creating a More Beautiful World, the theme of this year’s meeting.

The program included discussion surrounding the following topics: “How Artificial Intelligence Will Change the Way We Live and Think,” “Future Proofing our Business: Microforces, Challenges & Opportunities,” “Leadership Perspectives on Sustainability Value Creation and Growth,” “Transforming your brand in the new age of wellness-driven marketing: Pinterest and the wellness megatrend,” “The Role of Influence in the Consumer Decision Journey,” and “Environmentally Responsible Packaging in Corporate Sustainability Initiatives.”

New to this year’s Annual Meeting were four workshops, which offered a comprehensive assessment of the following subjects in a smaller, more intimate setting: “An International Standard for Natural and Organic Cosmetics,” “What’s Happening with Brexit?,” “Cannabis & Cosmetics,” and “Chinese Regulatory & Trade Update.”

Also unveiled at this year’s meeting was PCPC’s forward-thinking sustainability initiative, which will be given significant weight in the upcoming year. The objectives of the program are as follows:

• To advance member company sustainability practice and know-how;
•  To expand and enhance the industry’s robust sustainability narrative;
• And, to provide a strategic framework and focus for PCPC action, resources, and committee work.

“Our world is changing fast, and there are daunting social and environmental global challenges that can’t be solved, by one just institution or company,” said Westine. “By working with each other and with like-minded organizations, our industry has the opportunity to play an important role in creating a more beautiful future.”

“We don’t have to choose between public health and the environment. We can protect both,” George Calvert added, who was elected to serve as the Board of Directors’ Chair for the second consecutive year.

The Board of Directors, as elected in its entirety at the Annual Meeting, is as follows:

Chairman:  George Calvert, Chief Supply Chain Officer, Amway

Vice Chairs: Esi Bracey, Executive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer NA Beauty and Personal Care, Unilever

                      David Greenberg, Group President of Professional Products Division North America, L’Oréal

                      Alex Keith, CEO, P&G Beauty

                      Jeff Smith, Global Chief Transformation Officer, Johnson & Johnson

Secretary: Andrew Stanleick, Senior Vice President, Consumer Beauty Division, Coty

Treasurer: David Holl, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mary Kay Inc.

“We have a very bright future ahead,” said Calvert. “We carry a legacy of creativity, innovation, passion, responsibility, and entrepreneurship. We exhibit these traits every day through the thousands of new formulas, products, and patents we create and file every year, and the loyalty of the families who use and trust our products.”

To learn more about 2019 Annual Meeting, visit  www.personalcarecouncil.org

For Annual Meeting updates on Twitter @PCPC_News and #PCPC125.

For more information about cosmetics and personal care products, visit www.CosmeticsInfo.org

Based in Washington, D.C., the Personal Care Products Council is the leading national trade association representing the global cosmetic and personal care products industry. Founded in 1894, PCPC’s 600 member companies manufacture, distribute, and supply the vast majority of finished personal care products marketed in the U.S. As the makers of a diverse range of products millions of consumers rely on every day, from sunscreens, toothpaste and shampoo to moisturizer, lipstick and fragrance, personal care products companies are global leaders committed to product safety, quality and innovation.

The post PCPC Marks 125 Years of Creating a More Beautiful World appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

The post CVS Unveils New Beauty Aisles Reflecting Commitment to Transparency for Beauty Imagery appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

Annual Achiever Awards Celebrate Beauty MVPs and Inspire Future Leaders

On Friday, September 21st, Cosmetic Executive Women (CEW) celebrated the accomplishments of seven industry leaders –six women and one man, with its Achiever Awards Luncheon at the The New York Hilton Midtown.

Now in its 43^rd year, the Awards honor women who have reached the highest levels of the beauty industry. They also serve as inspiration to CEW’s now 10,000-plus members worldwide.

The 2018 Achiever Award honorees are: 

• Danyelle Boilard Paul, EVP & General Manager, Groupe Clarins USA, who has overseen its portfolio of skincare, cosmetics and fragrance brands in the U.S. and Canada since 2002;
• Lynn Emmolo, Chief Global Officer, Rodan + Fields, who has spent 30 years leading beauty brands like L’Oréal, Avon and Rodan + Fields, into new markets internationally;
• Tiffany Masterson, Founder & Chief Creative Officer, Drunk Elephant, whose passion for learning about beauty products’ composition inspired the development of trending indie products that improve skin health;   
• Vasiliki Petrou, Global EVP Prestige, Personal Care, Unilever, who has led socially conscious campaigns across Unilever’s Prestige Personal Care portfolio for more than two decades; and
• Tara Simon, SVP, Merchandising, Ulta Beauty, who channeled a love for the industry into her work at Ulta Beauty and a commitment to empowering other women.

In addition, CEW will present the Scent Innovator Award to Shoval Shavit Shapiro, Founder and Chief Creative, Amkiri, for her creation of a long-lasting fragrance ‘ink’ that is applied to the skin as body art.

And, for the first time, CEW will recognize the contributions of a male leader’s advancement of women. The inaugural MEN-tor Award will be presented to Marc Rey, President and CEO, Shiseido Americas, for his role in advocating for and increasing the presence of female leaders.

“CEW was founded with a singular vision of helping women in the beauty industry achieve, advance and inspire,” says CEW President Carlotta Jacobson. “We’re delighted to continue to honor our members’ accomplishments and contributions through our Achiever Awards. This month we reached a significant milestone – 10,000 members internationally – whom we will continue to empower and support as they pursue leadership roles in the beauty community.”   

In keeping with that commitment, CEW has invited the winners of its 2018 Top Talent Awards to share the dais at the Achiever Awards luncheon. The Top Talent Awards, which were presented in April, recognize the accomplishments of women at mid-career.

The 2018 Top Talent Award recipients are: Brooke Banwart, Vice President/DMM, Fragrance, Sephora; Doreen Bucher, Vice President, Global Marketing, Fine Fragrance, Symrise; Barbara Green, Head of Research & Development, NeoStrata Company Inc. (J&J); Molly Landman, Global Brand Director, Love Beauty & Planet and ApotheCARE Essentials, Unilever; Rukeyser Thompson, Senior Manager & Section Head, P&G Hair Research & Development, P&G; Ada Lien, Senior Vice President, Global Marketing, La Mer; and Sophie Lilly, Vice President, Global Business Development, Urban Decay (L’Oréal).

The event was sponsored by Meredith, IFF, Arcade Beauty, 24 Seven, Beauty IQ, Nordstrom Beauty, Wells Fargo Securities, Sephora, Tarte, IT Cosmetics, Anisa, Fusion PKG, Beauty Inc, Coty, Array, Stila, WWD, Consultancy Media, Badger & Winters, Moblty, Urban Warrior, Suite K, Walgreens and Kaplow Communications.

CEW is an international organization of 10,000 individual members representing a cross section of beauty and related businesses. The composition of membership includes leading & indie brands, retailers, the media and suppliers. CEW’s primary purpose is to provide programs online and in person to develop careers and knowledge of the beauty industry. CEW provides opportunities to connect and gain industry knowledge through networking events, trend reports, industry newsletters, interactive workshops and industry leader talks.

For more information, visit https://www.cew.org/.

The post 2018 CEW Achiever Awards appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

A growing litany of exposés by news organizations about how these platforms are riddled with bots, fake followers and fake accounts and more.  All of this leading to questions about the viability of working with influencers.

YouTube is notable because so many beauty influencers inhabit that platform and have huge followings there.

As The New York Times reported a couple of days ago, there’s an entire cottage industry of small firms and individuals who cater to the impatient people who are looking for a short cut to building an audience.

Whether it’s to boost the appearance of popularity or to leverage that fake following into a money-making scheme by tricking brands into paying them, it’s become problem.

Either way, its underhanded and undermines the credibility of the other influencers who aren’t buying fake followers, etc. Stories like this tend to inflict collateral damage by tarnishing the entire influencer industry.

No matter the motivation, it’s cheating (and possibly worse) and we’re thankful to The New York Times for outing another underhanded practice many would-be influencers are utilizing.

This has gone on for far too long

As I’ve written before, the urge to buy fake followers comes from the desire to “juice” the algorithm, to artificially boost the visibility of content, to get in front of more eyeballs.

This phenomenon isn’t limited to cyberspace and the brick and mortar world has its comparisons.

For example, it’s like driving past a night club on a cold, Friday evening with a long line waiting outside the velvet rope, everyone shivering, waiting to get in.

As you pass by, your immediate reaction is to think “this club is popular,” so you get on line with your friends anticipating that inside it’s hopping with fun and interesting people.

It’s not until you enter the club that you realize you are some of the first people there!

The beautiful people you were hoping to meet haven’t arrived yet, so you spent that time outside, shivering in the cold, for nothing.

You were duped by the appearance of popularity.

Let’s look a more “extreme” example, but one that works in tandem with cyberspace:

Imagine you walk past a shop that appears to be jam-packed with people. 

This triggers a thought in your mind, causing you to believe the place is popular, luring you inside for a few minutes, to look around to see what the fuss is about.

But once you get inside, you find out the place if full of… mannequins.

The shop you thought was packed full of people is instead filled with lifeless dummies standing around.

Okay, I admit, this last example, when you think about it, is creepy – almost something out of the Zombies!

But really, the analogy works when we relate it to cyberspace. 

The mannequins in the store are equivalent fake followers and subscribers online. They aren’t real and they certainly aren’t going to buy anything. 

Now, it also stands to reason that fake followers don’t respond to beauty tutorials by influencers. They don’t engage, share, comment, like and certainly don’t buy product.

So my advice to firms and influencers is this: don’t do it.

Want more evidence that it’s a bad idea?

The Times article is replete with examples of people and organizations who’ve been duped into buying fake views for one reason or another – and all regretted it.

Remember the old adage, “Anything worth doing, is worth doing well!”  Same is true when building an online following.

Keep in mind, YouTube as a social media platform is different than Twitter and Instagram 

The reason is that not only does the number of views factor into the algorithm, but the number of subscribers, comments and time watched counts as well.

Unfortunately, all of these social metrics can be bought to some degree. 

The good news is that their quality is usually poor and easy to spot.

So, what about beauty influencers, are they buying fake views for their videos? Is this something to be concerned about?

Well, as to how many beauty influencers have bought fake followers, I’m not sure (and neither is anyone else). But the problem isn’t any more prevalent in beauty than any other retail category.

So, beauty isn’t squeaky clean because no one is immune from the temptation.

But with news stories like this one by The Times and with company announcements like Unilever’s CMO Keith Weed calling for an end to the practice of buying fake followers, the influencer marketing industry is moving in the right direction.

This is all good for the beauty industry: brands and influencers alike.

The tolerance for bad behavior – like buying fake followers, views or subscribers – is finally on the wane. This is what the American Influencer Association aims to address, as well.

As we learned last week, fake followers are basically impossible to avoid entirely, because bots start following influencers as soon as they get to a certain level. So, even the most legitimate influencers unfortunately have them, but we can certainly look at percentages.

And, I predict that as this trend gains momentum, the beauty influencers who are legit and honest, will benefit even more.  Their reputations will be burnished because of their desire for integrity.

Adding to this, is that the number of tools being developed to determine who’s buying followers and views and who’s not, is on the rise.

This is good news for marketers as it will become easier and faster to determine fake followers.

Platforms like Instagram and Twitter are making an effort to stamp out the fakes, now its YouTube’s turn to step up to the plate.

In YouTube’s case, the administrators make periodic system updates to disrupt the suppliers of the fakes.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t normally take much time before the suppliers are able to adjust and be open for business again.

The suppliers say they get around YouTube’s system updates by making their traffic appear more believable (more human) by ensuring that the views come from users with prior views.

No matter what, the suppliers of fakes views and followers aren’t going away soon.

But with the trifecta of the social platforms getting more vigilant; brands demanding more transparency and accountability; and with honest hard-working influencers standing by their integrity, and the importance of micro-influencers on the rise, I see the battle being won. 

It may just take a while.

The post Another Domino Falls: Now YouTube Gets Outed for the Problem of Fake Views #YouTubePurge appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

However, the problem of fake followers, and the use of bots in general, has got marketers and brands a little nervous.

They’re so nervous that the problem is coming to a head and some social platforms are taking the initiative.

You don’t have to look any further than the latest #TwitterPurge for evidence.

But what about the other social media platforms, and in particular, Instagram?

Is Instagram in need of a purge now, too?

A recent study by Ghost Data suggests that of the reported 1 billion users on Instagram —up to 95 million bots, may be posing as real accounts. 

The last time Instagram cleaned out fake accounts was back in 2014 as reported by the Wall Street Journal. Back then, Instagram had 300 million users compared to the 1 billion it claims now.

Curious about the possibility for a parallel rise in the use of bots, Ghost Data conducted a survey to determine if fake accounts were growing in use. 

To do this, they purchased 20,000 bots and analyzed their qualities to assist them in identifying similar bots in over one million other accounts. 

The firm found that the bots tended to follow many famous Instagram accounts, but didn’t post much content of their own, other than reposting popular content scraped from other sources.

Therefore, the problem of fake followers is a real one.

The trouble is, however, not all “bots” are created equal and the term can mean different things.

The truth is, some bots are created to perform specific functions –often to save you time and make your life easier, while other bots are designed to trick or exploit the algorithms.

I know one prominent influencer who admitted to me that if you need a little extra something to juice up the algorithm, to get the algorithm to pay attention to you, buying fake followers is a common way to do it.

That being said, my goal here is not to discuss the ethics of buying fake followers, but to show you the many uses of bots and to show you how to spot fake followers – so you are in the know.

So, to clarify things, here’s a breakdown of some of the more popular uses for bots:

• Schedule and post your content on social platforms
• Send automated messages or replies
• Post similar messages over multiple social media accounts to scale your content
• Aggressively follow and unfollow other accounts as a strategy to grow your audience
• Auto-rounds are a bot that likes your Instagram posts (usually from small sized accounts) within 30 minutes of publishing to trick the platform algorithm into thinking your content is popular
• Power-likes are similar to auto-rounds but come from accounts with huge followings (500k to 1mm) prompting the algorithm to believe your content is really good stuff
• Fake followers to pump up the appearance of having a larger audience

As you can see, bots perform many functions.  Some are useful and meant to make posting content easier, while others are developed to deceive the algorithm into giving you more attention.

As we’ve written before, many users, even some notable celebrities, are guilty of boosting the appearance of having a large following by buying fake followers, a move Unilever’s CMO Keith Weed denounced in Cannes last month.

Since Weed’s statement, there’s been a marked reaction by brands and agencies to find better ways to vet influencers.

Even so, the problem will persist for a time until brands, social platforms and influencers come together to squelch it.

This is one of the challenges the American Influencer Association aims to address this year.

Until a solution is developed, we’ll have to make do, so let’s take a closer look at what this fake activity looks like, so you can identify it.

Good news: Fake followers are generally easy to spot. 

Fake followers are generated by small, boiler room operations located in the Philippines, Thailand or some other far eastern country.

These fake followers are created without much depth given to them and often lack profile pictures and even profile descriptions, like this one on Twitter:

It’s important to remember, however, that not all fake followers are purchased.  Some of them are bots that are sent to scrape content or perform other tasks.

I found the above follower on my account and I have no idea why it’s there.

The important thing to keep in mind is that every account has some fake followers present. The question is, how many? 

My goal here is to show you how to vet influencers’ followers so you can determine whether they are buying fakes to pump up their numbers.

But, don’t jump to conclusions. If some of your influencers have fake followers, it might not be their fault.

Now, let’s examine what they look like on Instagram:

Like Twitter, fake followers on Instagram will often have little information.

I’ve noticed a trend recently where fake followers will show up as private accounts like the one above. This is so you can’t see their lack of content or depth as a real person has.

A few details to notice about the example above:

• The profile photo is of a cartoon character rather than a person although fake accounts do sometimes use photos of people (scraped from dating sites)
• The name of the account “tgh_gg” makes it obvious this is a fake
• Lack of a profile description
• The account is private

However, these are the cheap and easy-to-spot fake followers. 

There are firms that will furnish real looking followers that include photos, profile descriptions and some content for a higher price, so this method is not foolproof.

This is where third party tools come in handy. 

One of the better ones is SocialBlade.  Using this tool, you can find information about the history of the account and stats on its followers whether it’s on YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Twitch and others.

Let’s look at one.

Instagram’s luxury niche has many accounts that are guilty of buying fake followers.

I’ll show you how to use SocialBlade and what to look for.

First, review the follower graph for the account you are reviewing and look for spikes in growth and steep drop offs.

The steep rises in followers are a sign of buying followers. Steep drop offs are evidence of purges by Instagram to weed out fake followers. 

Legitimate, organically grown audiences don’t look like this. Now look at the image below:

It’s a detailed look at evidence of fake followers being purged by Instagram.

Notice the daily drop off in followers – which is not necessarily abnormal.  This happens if an account is not maintained with fresh, quality content because the followers get bored.

But the precipitous drop of over 1500 followers is indicative of fake followers being purged from the account.

This begs the question, what do you look for then?

Look for an audience graph that shows a steady growth.  Growth can be rapid depending upon what strategies the influencer is employing to attract attention.

But more often than not, organically acquired audience growth looks like this:

The above chart is what you want to see with your influencer’s audience growth trajectory: slow and steady.

Wrapping-up

Fake follower bots are everywhere.  Therefore, be knowledgeable about how to spot them.  Also, be informed about what a healthy audience profile looks like on Instagram or any other social media platform.

Additionally, don’t cast influencers aside just because you find some fake followers on their rolls.  Instead, determine what percentage of fake followers is acceptable to you.  Is it 5% or 10%?

And one more thing, be sure to let the influencer you choose to work with know you are looking for fake followers.  Ask them to be transparent with you and purge them if they do exist.

Remember, the effort to stamp out the problem of fake followers is everybody’s job, not just the influencers.

The post Is an #InstagramPurge Next? appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

Fake accounts and followers have been long recognized as a nagging problem by digital marketers, but the social platforms seemed reluctant to do much about it.

Perhaps they didn’t want to admit to the problem, or they were hesitant to affect their user base numbers for their own perception reasons?  Wall Street probably has a say as well.

But they can’t turn a blind eye to it any longer.

This year has seen a growing call for the social platforms to finally take control of the situation and clean house.

In January, The New York Times conducted a much needed investigation and exposed the underground industry that supplies the fakes.  The story even outed some celebrities (and their PR firms) for buying fake followers to pump up their audience numbers.

The fallout from The Times article prompted calls in Congress for intervention by the Federal Trade Commission. It even prompted investigations by a couple of states, including New York State.

Other publications followed suit and started digging into the problem within their own industries. 

Naturally, no industry is immune and when WWD, following The Times’ lead, published an article in February about the problem of fake followers and fashion influencers another call for action was made. 

Like I said, no industry is immune. But then things got interesting.

As we reported last month, Keith Weed, the CMO of Unilever made an ultimatum in protest of the use of fake followers. 

Weed has gone so far as to prohibit his company from working with influencers who buy followers.  Not only that, but he’s calling for a set of industry guidelines and standards to be drawn up to govern the influencer marketing industry.

So not only is the media ramping up pressure for social platforms to act, but corporate America, too.

And the pressure hasn’t let up.

Just last month, Digiday ran their own expose about influencers admitting to buying fake followers because they felt pressure to do so by brands obsessed with large audience numbers.   But even more enlightening is how the “former influencer” interviewed in the article was encouraged and pressured into pumping up his follower numbers by PR firms.

Okay, so the problem is finally getting the attention it deserves, but has the fake follower problem reached its high tide?

Twitter’s Purge on Fake Followers Begins

Just last week, Twitter began its own crackdown on fake followers and fake accounts.

Predictably, the press is focused on how the purge affects the accounts of celebrities and politicians.  They’ve been quick to report that well known influencers like Kim Kardashian West lost about 3 percent of her Twitter following, dropping to a little over 58 million last Thursday.

There’s nothing unexpected here. Many celebrities have lost followers, but the degree of loss varies and is not enough to seriously impact their profiles or influence for the long term.

The real implications, however, are on the micro-influencers.

As I said before, no industry is immune and certainly the beauty industry is no exception. 

Many beauty influencers are likely guilty of buying fake followers, but no more than any other niche.  So, those who are on Twitter likely lost some followers.

One of my sources who works for an influencer platform reports that some influencers (no particular niche) have seen audience numbers drop by as much as 75%.

In full disclosure, I lost about 180 followers as well.  As I never bought them, these must have been bots or fake accounts set up to evangelize specific content for their owners. 

In many cases, it can be hard to tell a fake account from a real one.  Therefore, its critical that the social platforms take responsibility and do what they can to purge the fakes.

Since Twitter isn’t the place where most of the beauty influencers congregate, I don’t expect there to be much damage reported.  They use Twitter as a mechanism to evangelize their other social content.

Most beauty influencers gravitate to YouTube and Instagram where the emphasis is naturally on visual content.

So, what’s is the impact on beauty influencers?

This is most likely the opening salvo on fake followers and accounts. 

The other social media platforms will likely follow suit and do a purge of their own.  It might not be immediate, but the pressure is building.

As a result, some beauty influencers might take a hit to their follower accounts if they’ve purchased fake followers. 

I suggest they purge those followers now.  Don’t wait.

Unfortunately, the emphasis has been on large audience numbers because that’s what brands have demanded. 

The good news is that’s beginning to change.  They’re starting to figure out that large follower counts don’t equate to influence.

It’s about time, too.  There are plenty of beauty influencers with real, engaged audiences eager to work with brands.  Some have large followings, and some are micro influencers. 

Either way, all they need is a chance to prove themselves.

The post Have We Reached the High-Water Mark with Fake Followers? #TwitterPurge appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

It’s 2018, and many brands remain baffled about how to work with influencers. 

They struggle with which influencers to work with, tools to use and how to measure the effectiveness of their campaigns.

Rather than establish their own goals and then work to understand which influencers can help them achieve those, many brands continue to choose influencers based on inaccurate measures like number of followers and audience sizes.  Shallow measures like these lead to poor selection and disappointment with the return on investment.

And then there’s the problem of fake followers 

How do brands tell if an influencer’s audience is even real? 

As The New York Times reported, the problem of fake followers is widespread and often pursued even by well know celebrities. Surprisingly, even with the available tools, brands remain blind to this and find out only when it’s too late and the desired results disappoint.

Thankfully, many third-party tools exist for marketers to discover the viability of influencers’ followers, but knowing which ones are effective -and the sheer plethora of them, leaves one’s head spinning.

As I’ve written lately, choosing the right influencers for your brand doesn’t have to be difficult.  It simply requires using a proven method, some help from third party tools, along with that essential, human element of knowing what to look for.

And because the influencer industry is not as transparent as many of us would like, we still have to rely on our own skills as marketers to sift out the good influencers from the chaff.

Brands that don’t use proven methods are either ignorant, not working with seasoned professionals, or simply too lazy.  The result is that many continue to overpay influencers and work with ones who are incongruent.

Are Brands at a Disadvantage to Influencers?

According to some influence marketers, some fashion and beauty brands feel “out of control” when working with influencers and somehow believe the influencers are in charge. This mindset is baffling.

Since brands hold the money, and influencer marketing as a strategy wouldn’t exist without them, how can brands feel powerless when working with influencers? 

I can’t help but wonder where their PR and in-house marketing teams are? 

And don’t they work with competent agencies?

I wonder if the same brands feel “out of control” when conducting a traditional PR or advertising campaign? 

No, of course not.

So why is there a difference when working with influencers?

Brands setting up an influencer campaign need to pay attention to two simple things: relevance and engagement. 

These two basic metrics guide the philosophy and selection process necessary to working with the right influencers every time.

Third party tools and platforms can help you with this process, too, but you must know that none of them adequately vets the influencers or checks for fake followers.

You and your team have to do that on your own and this is where the human element is critical.

Thankfully, social platforms are slowly cleaning up their acts.

Just this week, it was reported that Twitter is cleaning house of fake accounts.

This is welcome news, but I expect fake followers to remain a problem.  Until influencers are held accountable for propping up their follower count by buying followers, they will likely continue.

Fortunately, the movement for influencer accountability is already underway -and being led by Unilever’s Keith Weed, as we’ve reported recently.

Additionally, some social platforms are easy to check for fake followers. 

For example, Twitter can be checked using the tool TwitterAudit, but other platforms like Facebook are more difficult and the human element is still required to spot fakes on most social media platforms.

So vetting influencers can be effectively done, it just takes some time and effort.

Brands that don’t vet influencers carefully can expect uneven or poor results.  Like any other marketing strategy, influencer marketing requires an upfront investment of time and money to be done right.

Any successful influencer strategy should be carefully mapped out and designed to achieve specific campaign goals.  These goals should be measured by specific KPIs used to measure success and to help re-adjust campaign strategy, if and when necessary.

Should brands focus on micro-influencers over “big name” influencers like the Kardashians?

Arguments exist on both sides of the micro vs mega-influencer strategy, but the governing principle should be what the brand wants to get out of working with influencers.

Is the purpose to drive brand awareness?  Or is it to generate leads and sales?

Once this is determined, the decision about what type of influencers to use can then be made.  If the goal is to boost awareness, then working with many influencers is necessary since frequency and repetition are needed. In this case, micro-influencers are the way to go.

An example of a beauty brand doing this well is L’Oreal which reportedly works with up to 20,000 influencers – most of them, micro-influencers. 

But they also work with select “big name” macro and mega-influencers, working hard to develop and maintain those relationships.

After all, don’t forget, many micro-influencers are influenced in their own right by the “big name” influencers they look up to!

Either way, brands are, indeed, in the driver’s seat.  And, the sooner they recognize this and begin to choose influencers based upon congruence while demanding accountability from them, the sooner they’ll start to feel how powerful this strategy really can be!

The post Are Brands Throwing Money Away on Influencer Marketing? appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.

And this light looms large as its from a heavy weight, global consumer brand.  Reportedly spending over $9 billion every year in marketing, Unilever has the chops – and the bucks – to affect change.

Weed was very clear.  He announced early Monday that Unilever will not work with influencers who buy followers.

Are you listening? Other brand leaders are and its welcome news to an industry that’s been struggling to tame the gold rush mentality that’s invaded its psyche.

Weed also made it clear that Unilever’s sub brands will actively look to eradicate from their marketing spend any influencers who buy fake followers, use bots to pump up their engagement, or any other dubious practices.

And, that Unilever would use its muscle (I mean clout) with vendor relationships where financial commitments were made to root out and eradicate such fraud.

(Can you hear Keanu Reeves say “Whooooaaa!”)

But it gets even better.

Weed also announced his intention to convene a summit of sorts with the World Federation of Advertisers, Instagram and Edelman chief executive Richard Edelman.  The aim is to hammer out a framework for bringing transparency to the influencer space.

The announcement, coming as it did during the festival, puts the spotlights right back on influencers.

That’s rich.  Really rich.  I mean, come on.

Why?

Because if it weren’t for huge firms like Unilever and Edelman – who’ve thrown money at influencers for years without demanding much transparency, the influencers wouldn’t be scrambling to pump up their follower counts and engagement ratios to get onto their radars.

It’s a symbiotic relationship, you see.

The public relations industry, in particular, treats influencer marketing as transactional because it’s how most PR people deal with journalists.  They pitch them when they need them, then move on.

But true influencer marketing is not about transactions.  It’s not just another form of advertising or media relations.  Done with care and effort, its about building real, lasting relationships with people who’ve built legitimate and engaged audiences of their own through their unique, genuine content.

Some industries approach influencers better than others and the technology industry is ahead of the pack.  By way of example, take a look at HPE. 

Since 2010, they have methodically built and maintained a sustainable influencer marketing program. (In full disclosure, I was instrumental in designing and driving this program.) The point is, they carefully identify and cultivate influencers who speak to their target consumers. Relationships are built by including them in their events and other marketing activities throughout the year.

And the beauty industry is catching up. Take a look at L’Oreal’s Beauty Squad.  The company is taking the long view by cultivating strategic relationships with influencers they deem to be instrumental in reaching their target consumers.

Now, does the influencer industry need accountability and more transparency?  Yes, it does – from brands and influencers alike.

(That’s what the American Influencer Association aims to do, but that’s for an upcoming post.)

But the cleanup, if you want to call it that, needs to come from the industry itself, not from some artificial summit organized by a PR firm and colossal brand. It needs to include the consultants, the agencies, practitioners and most of all the influencers.

As the beam from Unilever’s spotlight in Cannes scans over the influencer industry, we’ll see where this all takes us.

All said and done, it was one hell of a moment.

The post Unilever puts Spotlight on Fake Followers appeared first on The Beauty Influencers.