The Ethics of “Influencer Marketing”
Many celebrities make a living through their jobs, whether acting, singing, dancing, et cetera; however, another way to earn some cash is through paid sponsorships — also known as “influencer marketing” (Shamsian, 2017, para. 1). Keeping Up with the Kardashians star Scott Disick is one of these celebrities, and has not been shy with sponsoring products from companies such as Bootea (seen above, as cited in French, 2016). Here’s the problem: his original caption for this post (he re-wrote it shortly afterward) seemed to be a copied-and-pasted message from his publicist, telling him what to say about the product: “Here you go, at 4pm est, write the below. Caption: Keeping up with the summer workout routine with my morning @booteauk” (French, 2016). While making this mistake on social media may not generate the same drawbacks as making a disrespectful and insensitive comment, it still calls for some ethical evaluations to be made.
There are 15 ethical guidelines for proper social media use, outlined by Bowen (2013), and I am going to use these below to analyze how ethical Disick’s Instagram blunder was. Some guidelines may overlap, so whenever this happens, I will indicate it to avoid repeating information.
1. Was this post fair? In general, yes. Despite the error in his caption, Disick is being supportive of Bootea by promoting their products to his followers. Their followers have the right to know about products that may even help them with their workout routines.
2. Did this post avoid deception? Not necessarily. Seeing as though the caption was copied and pasted, we cannot tell if Disick has lied when he says he consistently uses Bootea. His past posts about Bootea have typically been quite similar, with Disick positioned in the same spot, leaning on his kitchen counter, giving a blank look to the camera — the only differences have been the clothes he was wearing in each post (French, 2016).
3. Did this post maintain respect? Somewhat, but not really. (See #1 and #2 for more.)
4. Did this post avoid secrecy? Not at all. The copying and pasting may have led followers to believe that Disick was secretly hiding what he truly uses to help with his workout routine. (See #2 for more.)
5. Would this post be ethical if reversed? Probably not. I am not Scott Disick, but I would assume that if he saw someone post a copied-and-pasted sponsorship caption, he would question that person’s true intentions with the sponsorship, and with the product itself.
6. Was this post transparent? No. The caption did not have any solid confirmation of a sponsorship; although, the correct Instagram handle for the company was tagged. The Federal Trade Commission (FTR) includes in their guidelines for sponsored posts that there must be a clear indication that they are advertisements; for instance, including #sponsored or #advertisement (Shamsian, 2017). Disick’s post did not follow this rule.
7. Was this post clearly identified? No. As Bowen (2013) mentions, “the lines among personal, professional, and public have become blurred” (p. 123), and this is exactly what happened here. Disick’s personal use of Bootea was left undetermined, while his professional obligation as a sponsor was overpowered by this caption.
8. How would this post look after a rational analysis? Confusing and suspicious. (See #2 for more about how Disick’s followers, and other Instagram users, may misinterpret his post.) When looking at different perspectives groups can have to the post, Disick’s publicist may feel embarrassed, and unethical, as they sent the caption to Disick to post — which may show even more deception if Disick did not even contribute to creating the caption; and Bootea may feel deceived if Disick does not actually use their products, as the post does not include any specific information about how Disick implements it into his morning.
9. Was this post clearly identified as either personal speech or a representation of the organization (Bowen, 2013, p. 126)? No. (See #6 and #7 for more.)
10. Were facts about the product disclosed in this post? Not really. This post did not detail much about Disick’s use of Bootea, other than it being a great addition to his workout routine. His followers, as well as the company, could have benefitted more from his sponsoring if he would have included information about the product, himself actually making and drinking it (instead of simply posing with the container), and how exactly it helps him with his workout routine.
11. Were sources and data verified in this post? Yes, and no. Disick tagged the correct Instagram handle for Bootea in his caption, showing that the source of the product was verified. However, it was not made explicitly clear if/that it was a sponsored advertisement for Bootea.
12. Was responsibility established in this post? We cannot know for sure. Based on #2, Disick may just be getting Bootea solely for getting money as a sponsor, not necessarily using it for his own leisure. Therefore, the copied-and-pasted caption could show Disick’s lack of responsibility.
13. Was this post made with good intentions? We cannot know for sure. (See #2 for more.)
14. Did this post build engagement with followers? Potentially, but not much. While stating that he used Bootea could help Disick’s followers engage with him, as well as one another, about their own workout routines, the lack of content in Disick’s caption limited the chance of this. (See #10 for more.)
15. Did this post enable trust with followers? No evidence suggests this. In fact, other evidence may go completely against it. As French (2016) reports, this was not the first time Disick has made a blunder like this, as he once wrote on a post sponsoring BrightWhite Smile, “Tag @brightwhitesmile and please tag in caption and on the actual photo” (para. 4).
Overall, this analysis of Scott Disick’s Instagram blunder shows social media users the importance of keeping what one posts clear, respectful, factual, and intentional. Was Disick’s post ethical? After considering the above 15 guidelines, no. Though Disick’s mistake does not indicate that he is a horrible person, it does indicate why accurate communication, information, and motivation for posts matter (Bowen, 2013). A genuine message about the Bootea product, as well as some photos of Disick actually using it, could have increased the ethics of his post. This is what will make “influencer marketing” truly influential.
References
Bowen, S. A. (2013). Using classic social media cases to distill ethical guidelines for digital engagement. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 28, 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/08900523.2013.793523
French, M. (2016, May 20). Scott Disick accidentally pastes instructions into caption on sponsored Instagram posts. Us Weekly. https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/scott-disick-accidentally-pastes-instructions-into-instagram-ad-caption-w207208/
Shamsian, J. (2017, June 14). Celebrities make millions of dollars with Instagram sponsorships — but they could be breaking the law. Insider. https://www.insider.com/celebrity-instagram-sponsorships-could-break-law-2017-6
