Why We Choose Not To 'Spill The Tea'

From the sensational tabloids of the 90’s to gossip magazines of the 00’s, none of us are immune to indulging in other’s salacious secrets. Today, social media has become the new tabloid magazine, with the likes of TikTok and Twitter acting as breeding grounds for exclusive details about everything from your favourite drama series to that highly publicised court case. And beyond snackable content, we’ve observed the rise of ‘tea spill’ channels such as ‘Spill Sesh’ and ‘Tea Spill’ with a combined audience of over 2.5M subscribers and a catalogue of over two thousand videos. Tuv, an American YouTube documentary commentator dubbed these channels as the “worst kind of channels” on his own critique video amassing over 1.3M views, categorising them as drama focusing on exposing public figures to make money from clueless viewers.

Like any tool, language has the potential for good and bad and that in between. The power of language can make and break careers, change lives and reframe realities. Anthropologist Misia Landau pushes this notion further by claiming that “language is not merely a device for communicating ideas about the world, but rather a tool for bringing the world into existence in the first place. Reality is not simply experienced or reflected in language, but instead is actually produced by language”. Basically, language matters and words matter. What we communicate and our considered use of text, audio and visuals to impart meaning through our shared lexicon generates our shared existence. It’s also imperative to acknowledge that much of our everyday language originates from different subcultures, and with the rise of social media, we start blur the lines between subcultures and the mainstream.

With this in mind - we ask ourselves - does certain terminology belong to the communities who created it? And if so, under what circumstances do others have permission to use it?

Take for example, ‘spill the tea’, a slang term often used to describe the act of sharing gossip or revealing personal information which we have all become familiar with. It’s been popularised by influencers and celebrities and adopted into mainstream culture featuring in conversations on social media and everyday interactions. It would seem that this wordplay would marry nicely with a playful creative idea for a tea brand, given the amount of traction it’s already gained with existing schemas such as Kermit the frog, who fronted Lipton’s “Be More Tea” campaign in 2014. The advert travelled on social media in the hands of a wider audience, turning Kermit into a meme beyond the original intent of the brand idea of kindness.By 2016, the little green puppet had gone viral twice, and ‘tea’ had become synonymous with ‘gossip’.

As with many other slang words that catch on social media, ‘spill the tea’ did not originate online. Its etymology has been raised in discussion and debate in recent years, indicating much more deep-rooted history that dates back decades, perhaps centuries and as a culmination of adaptations and re-interpretations. Theories by linguists and historians of ‘spill the tea’ range from suggesting it’s rooted in 18th century England, where ladies sit in their Porche area and chit-chat over numerous cups of tea, to it being a direct descendent of the British phrase ‘spill the beans’.?

However the most plausible theory leads us to African American drag culture of the 90’s. Lady Chablis, an iconic drag queen featured in the 1994 book ‘Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil’ used ‘spill the T’ where T represented truth. As drag culture, particularly black drag culture gained prominence with shows like RuPaul’s Drag Race, it propelled the term further to a larger audience, spreading it outside of LGBTQIA+ and African American community to mainstream culture where an evolution of linguistics occur, shifting T to ‘tea’ a la Kermit meme and the ‘tea spill’ channels of today. In essence, the vernacular of drag culture has transcended into pop culture at large making it difficult to trace its roots and therefore bring awareness to it.

Dissecting ‘spill the tea’ further, it is important to recognise that drag culture flourished from the Harlem Renaissance, home to a significant population of African Americans. The origin points of this term and many others like ‘lit’ and ‘woke’ can be traced back to AAVE (African American Vernacular English). As a phrase becomes adopted by the masses, it becomes absorbed by other communities who neglect the context and nuances of the phrase, which at times can be devastating to the significance of the culture of origin. Unfortunately, appropriation of black culture for commercial gain is not entirely new, and similarly, the LGBTQIA+ community have also continually faced oppression and ostracisation in the past and present. The line between cultural appropriation and organic linguistic evolution is a tightrope as long as these groups face these challenges. The co-opting of their language by other groups simply reinforces the pop culture machine, with most turning a blind eye to these marginalised communities.

Taking a step back, language has always been, to different extents, a cross-pollinating of linguistics between people within one culture and across cultures. The merging of dialects is inevitable. In some instances, it can even be beneficial to marginalised communities such as the case for UK slang Polari, a fusion of vernacular in itself, which elevated ‘butch’ and ‘camp’ into international queer discourse. Sometimes by acknowledging and verbalising, we create better awareness and understanding than closing off slang from popular culture, the masses, and thus mainstream acceptance.

Back to our question on ownership and permission, Sadia Siddiqiu from Language Matters offers her point of view. She likens language to “a living, breathing organism that’s constantly evolving. Words come in and out of circulation, reflecting the social, political, and cultural context of that time.” She extends on this with a piece of advice:

“The crux of this discussion is the difference between cultural appreciation and cultural appropriation. The former acknowledges the etymology—the literal genes of a term—while the latter takes a concept and strips it of its roots. If you’re going to use or consume something, the least you can do is acknowledge where it comes from.”

AAVE has been the source for so many slang terms in contemporary language, whether it is appropriate for non-Black groups to use this comes down to understanding and intention. Whilst the nature of certain phrases are banded around carelessly and in a carefree manner by individuals and groups, those in corporate marketing must tread extremely carefully. Brands in the race to capture the minds and hearts of Gen Z are mirroring their tone and language, often working with those at the apex of culture from Black communities and the LGBTQIA+ causes for cultural cachet. As soon as corporations use it, it becomes commercialised, most of the time giving nothing back to the community it took from. The issue isn’t necessarily the words themselves, but the undertone of oppression that it’s loaded with. Cultural appropriation of words work similar to any other act of cultural appropriation - those in power commodify those they persecute, and today, institutionalised racism and homophobia still remain rife.

So all that leads us to why we didn’t encourage PG to 'Spill The Tea'.

The line between linguistic evolution and cultural appropriation is fine, but clear. For us, helping PG Tips’ to find their calling for progress means we collectively hold ourselves accountable to a higher standard in advertising. To absorb ‘spill the tea’ as a language and behaviour would be at odds with our ethos and the brand’s new direction which champions fresh perspectives and celebrates modern Britain. For the industry at large, we should be playing more foresighted than short-sighted, deploying resources and effort towards inclusivity rather than caving into the immediate gratification of a content post or brand activation that buys one moment of fame. Clicks, engagement and sales matter, but never at the expense of those who struggle. And when intentions are good but executions fall short, we should have the humility to ride out that conversation as we might all learn something along the way.