Influencer or fraudster? How to know the difference
Influencer marketing has the potential to drive positive outcomes for brands, but realising them requires action, writes Dafydd Woodward
Influencer marketing is under scrutiny, and this is amplified by recent documentaries such as Netflix’s investigation into the chaos of Fyre Festival and its celebrity promoters. The concern is valid. Unprofessional influencer activity is costing brands dearly, potentially driving more than $100 million in annual advertising losses on Instagram alone.
Yet the rewards of aligning with powerful digital forces are too great to ignore. Two-fifths (38%) of those who follow influencers are more likely to believe them than traditionally-delivered commercial messages from brands.
Put simply, influencer marketing has the potential to drive positive outcomes for brands, but realising them requires action. Marketers must improve their understanding of the challenge at hand, and learn how to identify the genuine digital leaders who have the power to drive opinion with their target audiences.
The influencer conundrum
Ranked the most important influencer channel, Instagram is often the backdrop for headline malpractice case studies. Research from influencer analyst firm, CampaignDeus, revealed 12% of UK Instagram influencers bought fake followers in the first six months of 2018. Yet fraudulent conduct is not restricted to one platform. Bots, fake followers and interactions extend across Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Snapchat, and Pinterest.
For marketers, this creates a dilemma. Social media offers a vital opportunity to connect with digitally focused consumers, not only because of its reach but also the trust users place in influencers. Generation Z, for instance, will soon be the largest consumer group on the planet and 44% will take the word of their favourite vloggers and bloggers over what brands say about themselves. So, it’s only logical that investment allotted to influencer marketing is expected to rise significantly, as much as $10 billion annually by 2020.
Influencer marketing is now big business, which demands the highest standards of scrutiny, including true third-party verification by independent industry bodies to ensure the validity of consumer impressions – much like other media formats. Brand marketers and their agencies should create their own quality checklist to help differentiate premium influencers (who offer a real opportunity to achieve client marketing objectives) and fakers who are perpetrating advertising fraud. Like in other corners of digital media, getting to this level of accountability will likely take time. However, marketers including influencer tactics in their campaigns today, can take pragmatic steps to protect their investments.
Influencer Marketing’s Golden Rules:
Due diligence can pay dividends, and there are three key steps brand marketers should take to protect their budgets:
- Watch follower variation
There are two reasons for a sizeable change in followers. One is a sudden burst of publicity around an individual — see the spike of popularity for James Middleton’s Instagram account after it was discovered; he gained 10,000 new followers in 24 hours. The other reason for a surge of numbers (with no obvious cause) is driven by fraud.
- Track disproportionate engagement
A mismatched ratio of followers to engagement levels is a clear red flag. This isn’t to say that fluctuation is bad; varied interaction from post-to-post is actually a signal of authenticity, as influencers can’t always hit the right mark with every single audience member. But when follower volumes are vast and engagement is consistently low, it can often be explained by a considerable percentage of paid or fake followers. Although there is no perfect ratio, monitoring engagement levels over time will give agencies the insight they need to spot suspicious trends, and keep away from low-value influencers.
- Don’t ignore micro influencers
Attracting 10,000 followers or fewer, micro-influencers are frequently overlooked as a vehicle for impactful communications, and this is a serious mistake. The specialised nature of niche players means audiences are typically made up of devoted followers with a specific passion and trust in their chosen influencers — everything marketers need to deliver targeted messages that stand a strong chance of achieving personal resonance and results. Plus, lower advertiser demand for micro-influencers potentially reduces costs, as well as the risk of messaging to fake followers. Marketers should balance their brand–influencer mix. Going micro can be safer and more profitable than automatically opting for influencers with millions of followers. Bigger isn’t always better.
With the right approach, influencer marketing has the power to serve brands well — after all, reaching specific audiences through authentic channels and driving desirable outcomes is what keeps them in business. But they must proceed with caution. There is a fine line between genuine influencers with loyal followings and those who look the part but draw their clout from bots. It is up to brand marketers and their agencies to put the practices in place to know the difference.
<br>
Dafydd Woodward is Global Lead at INCA