Deinfluencing & Underconsumption Core : TikTok made me..buy it/NOT buy it
Chaani Srivastava
Intellectual Property, Technology & Sustainability Lawyer at LOCS Online | AI Ethicist | Author | Podcast Host
The story of - consumption, market dynamics, the state of our global economy and the cost of living crisis - as it unfolds on TikTok
My consumption story
I am not going to take the holier than thou stand to say that I am an expert who sees through trends and doesn’t succumb to buying more stuff online than I would like to admit. Before we get into the trends, I would like to share some vital information about my belief about skincare.. yes, you heard it right - skincare. I was born in a family that had women swearing by nuskas or home remedies and prescribed herbs and spices as fixes to any skin concern under the sun. With time, chemical formulations got better and one’s entire skincare regimen with a dermatologist’s prescription was accessible with top of the line ingredients, in less than one hundredth price of one jar of the La Prairie Platinum Rare Haute-Rejuvenation Face Cream, (which is btw, touted as one of the most expensive moisturisers in the world). I am very Almond eyes, Lotus feet meets Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients .. you get the drift! All of this to say, commercial celebrity beauty brands are not even on my list of things to buy when it comes to skincare. But then one day earlier this year, thanks to the sophisticated algorithms recognising my growing interest in one such product that I repeatedly started seeing online - a “glazing milk” if you will (that contains the ceramides, magnesium and beta glucan of one’s dreams!) gave me pause. I cannot access TikTok when I’m in India, as it is one of the many apps that are banned in the country, so I obviously started seeing this particular product on other social media sites such as Instagram, where I began seeing a barrage of influencers repost their TikTok videos and shorts to their Instagram profiles. After a few days of seeing it’s glowing reviews and incessant science lessons around its formulation, I became increasingly convinced that I definitely am in need of this product and since we don’t get the product in India, I would have to wait for it. While casually figuring out ways to get my hands on this bottle of pure magic, I chanced upon another product by the same brand, an ephemeral “peptide glazing fluid” - one that promised hydration in ways that were beyond reasonable belief.
I paused and marvelled at how someone like me, who has a very clear cut idea about what works for me, what I want and where I can get it - is subconsciously hatching plans to get my hands on these products, googling the various outlets of the brand and thinking of multiple people who can bring these products for me. The point of telling you my long convoluted personal experience is that I, talking about overconsumption as the root cause of many of our problems today, I - turned out to be not so different after all - I was, as they call it- influenced into believing that my heart has two holes - one the shape of a bottle of glazing milk and another that of the peptide glazing fluid! We all fall for one thing or the other, depending upon our own individual seduction points. For me it was skincare, for someone else it might be apparel or furniture or gadgets, but consuming anything in excess - leads to the same complications.
To my utter surprise my own propensity towards getting curious about products that were covertly and overtly advertised on social media, propelled me to research the world of TikTok trends. It made me think that as marketing tools grow more sophisticated by the day, none of us can be considered above our latent weak points to fall for one ad or the other that tugs at our desire strings and leads us to consume more.
According to research carried out by Kantar, users are less likely to perceive ads negatively on TikTok compared to other social media platforms, and find ads on the app to be more trendsetting than those featured on other sites. In the last edition, we discussed the reasons of discussing TikTok out of all other platforms, in great detail. Today, we analyse the story of how trends, that originally propagate consumption, have evolved into their 2024 iteration - where they are advocating against consumption, the real factor that is responsible for the genesis of such trends, and the dangers of engaging in such trends - both as an influencer/content creator as well as the consumer.
Origin story of deinfluencing : “#LashGate2023”
The story began in early 2023 when a popular TikTok beauty influencer partnered with another popular brand to promote its mascara. The influencer was called out by several other influencers on how she wore falsies (false eyelashes) to promote the said mascara to lure people into buying the product. The influencer and the sponsoring company did not comment on the blazing controversy or #mascaragate on TikTok. This collective exposure led to a significant decline in sales and raised questions about the authenticity of influencer endorsements. However, it also led to a whirlpool of discussions on the impact of this kind of messaging. Varied view points were raised, including some that shifted the blame on other influencers for calling out these influencers pointlessly just to sound cool.
“Beauty is an industry that’s about image. So, to a certain degree, you’re always going to see advertising and know there’s a prestige or glamorous sheen. But this has to do with what a brand or person is you actually claiming. You don’t see McDonald’s saying, ‘This burger is healthy for you’. We’re in the golden age of the huckster (in which hustling and grinding for work has seemingly evolved into flagrant lies and gaslighting for personal enrichment). We feel we can’t trust institutions. People are upset with the influencer because it seems like there’s a new thing like this coming out every day. We also live in a culture where, online, everyone wants to call everything out as a problem. But it’s not healthy.” - Douglas Brundage, CEO of creative agency Kingsland
Some others claimed that this kind of stance, while correct in its assessment of the beauty industry, is still over-simplistic, as the constant online scrutiny can serve as a powerful tool for holding individuals and institutions accountable. It can expose deceptive practices, harmful products, or misleading claims. More than anything, this debate brought forth and got pinned to the point that - online discourse can empower consumers to make informed choices. This perspective became the birth place of #deinfluencing.
Deinfluencers, initially began as erstwhile influencers, content creators or ordinary individuals who aimed to educate their followers about the potential downsides of certain products or trends. By highlighting the limitations, drawbacks, or overhyped aspects of popular items, they empower consumers to make more informed purchasing decisions. Eventually they came to tell their followers what to buy instead. Therefore, deinfluncers basically became influencers who were just being transparent about the products they were reviewing on their social media channels to their audiences and not really doing anything to lower consumption.
It is a shame that by the time this trend faded, it had lost its essence. The de-influencing movement showed a lot of potential in theory, as it seemed to experts that it could focus on overconsumption and finally deal with consumerism on social media. But the expectation that TikTok, with its TikTok Shop and its sophisticated algorithms was going to lead this revolution - was a foolish one. Deinfluencing could not evolve from a response to mass advertising to a more nuanced discussion around overconsumption. As an extension, it didn’t do much in the direction of lowering consumption or having a positive impact on the environment as it ultimately became a “buy this instead of buying that” trend.
Origin story of Underconsumption Core
The first post that used the term “underconsumption core” surfaced in a video in July 2024 — when a TikTok-er, 18-year-old Maya “Liu” Feldman from Germany showed “the old hair dryer she still uses, and clothes from seventh grade and holey jeans she still wears”. Feldman’s TikTok immediately went viral, racking up more than 436,500 likes and 2.3 million views. Many users commented that they lead a similar lifestyle or that they were motivated to spend less after watching Feldman’s video.
领英推荐
This trend was different from deinfluencing and it piqued my interest as it pointed sharply to the larger umbrella of - consumption. It emphasises a minimalist lifestyle that prioritises functionality over excess. The underconsumption core movement gained traction, particularly among younger generations who are increasingly concerned about the environmental and social impacts of consumerism.
Followers of this movement advocate for reducing consumption, reusing items, and repairing rather than replacing. The idea is that by embracing a more sustainable and frugal approach, individuals can contribute to environmental conservation and personal financial well-being.. But wait, how is that underconsumption? Isn’t that normal consumption? Which individuals are we talking about? This trend which was was technically supposed to be about ethical consumerism, was not simply about being a normal person and having a normal amount of possessions. If you watch this trend closely, you’ll find that many “people” (influencers and content creators portraying this lifestyle) who are considered under-consumers are still over-consumers in other areas of their life, such as buying unnecessary things or are constantly seen going shopping. Many criticised the way that some TikTok influencers were participating in the underconsumption trend by showcasing their poverty or by buying things that are out of date or not in style. Tone deaf actions like these just diluted the whole point of this trend. It also put undue pressure on those who genuinely cannot afford to be this trend’s version of an “under-consumer”. As for them, it would be totally normal to repair things that are broken or replace that which is worn out. Katlyn Stewart, a prominent Australian YouTuber and content creator, known online as the Drama Kween, has garnered a significant following for her incisive commentary on trending topics and controversial issues. In her latest analysis, Stewart has raised concerns about a particular social media trend, positing that while it might seem harmless at first glance, it could have a disproportionately negative impact on individuals from marginalised communities.
Stewart argues that the trend, which often involves extravagant displays of wealth or privilege, can be particularly cruel for those who are exposed to such aspirational content but lack the resources to participate. She emphasises that for individuals living in conditions of economic hardship, these trends can create a sense of unattainability and exacerbate feelings of inadequacy. Here are her two bits on this topic -
Dangers of romanticising the cost of living crisis
Examining the evolution of these two trends over the past two years, it becomes evident that they foreshadowed the global cost-of-living crisis. Initially, deinfluencing served as a counterbalance to overconsumption and misleading marketing. Underconsumption, too, began by promoting responsible consumer behaviour by emphasising need-based purchases and product longevity.
However, as the threat of a global recession loomed earlier this year, subtle shifts in these trends emerged. While the messaging remained largely consistent, there was a growing tendency to normalize and even romanticize the challenges associated with rising costs. This shift inadvertently placed the onus on individual consumers rather than governments, potentially leading to harmful consequences.
While influencers and content creators have a significant platform, it's crucial that they exercise caution when discussing economic issues. By avoiding trends that could inadvertently shift accountability away from those in power, they can better serve their audience and contribute to a more informed and equitable society.
First, it can create a false sense of agency and control. Consumers may feel empowered by their ability to reduce spending and live a minimalist lifestyle. However, this can obscure the systemic issues driving the crisis, such as rising inflation, stagnant wages, and inadequate social safety nets. By focusing on individual choices, consumers may overlook the structural problems that require government intervention.
Second, it can reinforce harmful stereotypes about consumerism and materialism. The idea that individuals are solely responsible for their financial woes can perpetuate the myth that consumerism is inherently bad. This can stigmatise those who are unable to afford a minimalist lifestyle, further marginalising them.
Third, it can undermine collective action. When individuals believe that their personal choices are the primary drivers of economic hardship, they may be less likely to engage in collective action to demand government reforms. This can weaken the power of citizens to hold their governments accountable and address the root causes of the crisis.
In conclusion, while trends like "deinfluencing" and "under consumption" may offer temporary relief for individuals struggling with rising costs, they ultimately do more harm than good. Governments often bear the primary responsibility for ensuring economic stability and addressing inequality. When individuals are solely responsible for navigating the crisis, it can lead to a sense of helplessness and resignation. Moreover, the market dynamics of consumerism are complex and interconnected.
My story of consumption just goes to show the power of social media in shaping consumer preferences and behaviours, even for those of us who are acutely aware of its dangers. While these platforms and trends may promote different products or suggest new ways of living, it's important to consider the broader context. For our context, ultimately, addressing the root causes of something like the cost of living crisis requires a collective effort from governments, corporations, and individuals. While individual choices can definitely impact demand, the overall economy is influenced by factors beyond consumer behaviour, such as corporate practices, government policies, and global events.