The Brief.

The business of content.

Tag: Brand Partnerships

  • Influencer Marketing Fails: Real Cases of Brand Deals Backfiring (and What to Learn)

    Influencer Marketing Fails: Real Cases of Brand Deals Backfiring (and What to Learn)

    Influencer marketing has matured into a central pillar of brand strategy, yet its failures remain some of the most instructive. When a campaign collapses, the problems rarely stem from a single misstep.

    Misaligned values, careless vetting, rushed approvals, or a basic misunderstanding of how an audience works — these are the fault lines that show up again and again. The following cases illustrate how fragile the relationship between creator, brand, and community can be, and what smart creators should take away from each.

    The Oversight Problem: When a Creator’s Past Resurfaces

    Brands still underestimate the permanence of online behaviour. Several high-profile partnerships have derailed when a creator’s old posts were surfaced mid-campaign — sometimes hours after a launch. The issue isn’t simply “old tweets”; it’s the sense of negligence. When a brand appears unaware of a creator’s public history, audiences read it as a lack of due diligence, and the creator is left carrying the fallout.

    Case Study: Laura Lee’s 2018 Morphe Collaboration Collapse

    Beauty influencer Laura Lee lost multiple brand partnerships — including a planned expansion of her collaboration with Morphe — after old racist tweets resurfaced during the 2018 YouTube beauty-community fallout. The posts had been public for years, yet no brand caught them during vetting. When they finally emerged, the backlash was swift: products were pulled, campaigns were paused, and Lee disappeared from YouTube for nearly a month.

    Takeaway for creators: every partnership is a transparency exercise. You should know what a brand is likely to uncover — and what you may need to address proactively — long before the contract is signed.

    The Misalignment: When a Brand Chooses the Wrong Spokesperson

    There are countless examples of brands choosing influencers whose lifestyles conflict directly with the product they’re promoting: wellness creators endorsing sugary drinks; sustainability voices fronting fast-fashion hauls; luxury fashion houses pairing with influencers known more for controversy than culture. These partnerships tend to unravel quickly because audiences recognise the disconnect immediately. Authenticity isn’t a buzzword here; it’s a basic market expectation.

    Case Study: Kendall Jenner & Pepsi’s Protest Commercial (2017)

    Few campaigns illustrate misalignment more clearly than Pepsi’s 2017 protest-themed commercial starring Kendall Jenner. Jenner — whose public persona is firmly linked to fashion and entertainment rather than activism — was placed at the centre of a politically charged narrative. The ad was condemned across the political spectrum for trivialising social justice movements, and Pepsi withdrew it within 24 hours.

    Takeaway for creators: if a deal feels off, it usually is. Misaligned partnerships damage long-term credibility far more than they help short-term income.

    The Tone-Deaf Campaign: When a Brief Ignores Reality

    Campaigns have stumbled for reasons as simple as bad timing — launching aspirational travel content in the middle of a natural disaster — or as complex as cultural insensitivity baked into the creative concept. Global brands still make these mistakes, and creators often end up absorbing the public criticism because they are the visible face of the initiative.

    Case Study: UK Influencers’ Branded Dubai Trips During the 2021 Lockdown

    In early 2021 — during one of the UK’s strictest COVID-19 lockdowns — a wave of British influencers flew to Dubai for sponsored content shoots with fashion and fitness brands including PrettyLittleThing, Oh Polly, Bo+Tee, and others. While the campaigns themselves were ordinary (swimwear hauls, gym-wear shoots, resort lifestyle content), the context was not: millions of people were prohibited from travelling, many hadn’t seen family for months, and the news cycle was dominated by ICU overcrowding.

    The backlash was immediate. The influencers were accused of exploiting a “work trip” loophole to holiday abroad, and the brands themselves were criticised for encouraging non-essential travel at a moment when the public mood was deeply sensitive. Several creators posted apologies or clarifications; some deleted the content entirely. Airlines, hotels, and tourism partners distanced themselves. UK media ran wall-to-wall coverage for weeks.

    Takeaway for creators: read briefs critically. If the timing, message, or cultural framing feels disconnected from reality, raise the concern early. Silence is rarely rewarded when things go wrong.

    The Transparency Crisis: When #ad Isn’t Enough

    FTC rules are clear, but implementation remains inconsistent. Several creators have faced backlash not because they hid a partnership, but because the disclosure felt buried — a soft hashtag, a vague caption, an implied collaboration. Audiences read this as evasiveness, not ambiguity. And once trust slips, it rarely returns to baseline.

    Case Study: Fyre Festival & the FTC’s Disclosure Warning (2017)

    Influencers including Bella Hadid, Emily Ratajkowski, and a wave of mid-tier creators promoted Fyre Festival without any disclosure that they were paid. After the event collapsed, the FTC issued guidance explicitly referencing the incident: disclosures must be clear, conspicuous, and unambiguous. Several creators faced public criticism not because they promoted the festival, but because the posts appeared intentionally opaque.

    Takeaway for creators: err on the side of clarity. A well-disclosed partnership is rarely the problem; a poorly disclosed one almost always is.

    The Brand Misstep: When a Company Uses Influencers to Clean Up Its Own Controversy

    Another recurring scenario: a brand facing public scrutiny turns to influencers to shift the narrative. Creators who sign on often underestimate how quickly audiences recognise damage control. These campaigns tend to backfire, dragging creators into controversies they didn’t create.

    Case Study: Shein’s 2023 “Factory Tour” with Influencers

    In 2023, Shein flew a small group of US influencers to China for a curated, highly controlled factory tour. The aim was to counter widespread criticism of labour conditions and environmental practices. The move backfired immediately: the influencers were criticised for appearing to act as brand representatives rather than independent reviewers, and the content was widely mocked as propaganda.

    Takeaway for creators: evaluate the wider context. A partnership with a troubled brand may pay well, but it can cost far more in reputation.

    What Smart Creators Learn From These Failures

    Creators who navigate partnerships well tend to share a few habits: they vet brands with the same scrutiny brands apply to them; they decline briefs that feel rushed or tone-deaf; they protect their audiences’ trust as a professional asset; they ask for clarity, context, and control before they commit. The most successful creators aren’t immune to mistakes, but they build systems that prevent them.

    • Know your own archive. Treat old posts, videos, and tweets as part of your professional footprint. If something could surface later, address it before a brand or audience does.
    • Assess brand–creator fit as critically as brands assess you. A well-paying campaign can still erode long-term trust if the product or narrative contradicts how your audience sees you.
    • Ask about timing. When content goes live matters as much as what it says. Creators should insist on knowing the publish window — and should speak up if the context makes the campaign tone-deaf.
    • Demand clarity on creative control. If a brief feels politically charged, culturally sensitive, or overly polished, request visibility on the final cut or withdraw early.
    • Disclose cleanly, not minimally. A disclosure that blends into a caption does more damage than no disclosure at all. Use clear language at the top, not buried hashtags.
    • Look beyond the fee. If a brand is facing reputational issues, your involvement becomes part of the crisis-management narrative. Decide whether that’s a role you want.
    • Build a pre-flight checklist. Before accepting a partnership, review alignment, audience fit, timing, platform rules, disclosure requirements, potential backlash triggers, and long-term reputational risk.
    • Treat your audience as an asset, not a variable. If a collaboration feels like it might strain their trust, it usually will — and trust is harder to rebuild than to protect.

  • From Bedroom Mirror to Boardroom

    From Bedroom Mirror to Boardroom

    How a generation of young women are transforming mirror selfies and ‘GRWM’ videos into fully fledged fashion and beauty businesses.

    Scroll through Instagram on any given morning and you’ll see it: a softly lit bedroom, a girl in front of a mirror, phone tilted just so. It’s a scene so familiar it barely registers. But beneath that simplicity lies a complex and increasingly powerful engine of commerce — one that’s reshaping how style moves from personal expression to marketable brand.

    What used to be dismissed as vanity posting has become a launchpad. Mirror selfies, ‘get ready with me’ videos, and low-stakes styling clips are now early-stage branding exercises for a growing class of young female creators building empires out of their bedrooms.

    Emma Chamberlain

    Aesthetic as strategy

    The early influencer economy rewarded scale: glossy sponsored posts, aspirational trips, and big follower counts. Today, the power is shifting. Smaller, tightly defined communities — often built around one girl’s wardrobe, routine, or beauty rituals — drive more targeted engagement than mass-market celebrity campaigns ever could.

    Look at creators like Matilda Djerf. What began as an Instagram feed of hair tutorials and mirror outfits grew into Djerf Avenue, a multimillion-dollar fashion label worn by girls from Stockholm to Seoul. Her brand didn’t emerge from a boardroom brainstorm; it was built post by post, over years, by cultivating a personal aesthetic that felt both intimate and aspirational.

    Then there’s Emma Chamberlain, whose offhand personal style — thrifted vintage, hoodies, half-buttoned shirts — redefined what “influence” could look like. She parlayed that identity into Chamberlain Coffee, a brand that mirrors her irreverent, slightly chaotic persona. Her image didn’t follow a marketing plan. It was the marketing plan.

    Nitsan Raiter

    From personal taste to intellectual property

    This is the crucial shift: taste, once a soft asset, is now hard currency. A mirror selfie isn’t just documentation; it’s an early-stage product test. Affiliate links and soft drops allow creators to measure demand before manufacturing at scale. Brands follow their audiences rather than the other way around.

    In 2024, affiliate revenue among female fashion and beauty influencers on Instagram and TikTok grew by over 40%, according to data from Lyst. Smaller creators — typically those with 10–100k followers — consistently outperform larger influencers on conversion rates. It’s not about reach anymore; it’s about resonance.

    A new generation of founders understands this intuitively. Nitsan Raiter, for example, built her beauty brand Mind Your Skin not from glossy campaign shoots, but through years of sharing her personal skincare routine on Instagram Stories. By the time she launched, she had a built-in customer base who trusted her taste because they’d watched her evolve it in real time.

    The rise of the one-woman brand

    In practical terms, many of these businesses begin almost accidentally. A creator posts a thrift haul or a handmade jewellery drop. The response is immediate. DMs turn into orders. Orders turn into spreadsheets. Within a year, she’s negotiating with suppliers in Portugal or fulfillment partners in Los Angeles.

    But behind the casual tone lies a shrewd understanding of audience behaviour. The most successful fashion and beauty creators don’t try to reach everyone. They speak directly to a niche group — often young women who share not just a style, but a worldview. Their drops sell out not because they’re aggressively marketed, but because they feel personal.

    This intimacy is strategic. A “drop” on Instagram becomes a focus group. A mirror outfit post functions as pre-launch hype. It’s a loop that bypasses traditional advertising altogether.

    Camille Charrière

    The shifting power balance with legacy brands

    Legacy fashion and beauty houses have noticed. Where they once dictated trends, they now court them. Instead of sponsoring campaigns, they collaborate with individual creators who command small but fiercely loyal audiences.

    “Micro-creators can move product faster than some of our mid-tier retail campaigns,” says a marketing director at a major beauty label (who asked not to be named discussing strategy). “When their followers trust their taste, they don’t need convincing. They just buy.”

    This dynamic has tilted the balance of power. It’s no longer unusual to see a 23-year-old influencer with a home studio out-performing global fashion brands on product sell-through — with a fraction of the overhead.

    The cost of being the product

    But with power comes exposure. When your face, body, or personal taste is the brand, the line between professional and personal can collapse. Creators face intense pressure to maintain an image that isn’t just flattering but commercially viable. Burnout, parasocial scrutiny, and the demand to “stay on trend” all factor into this new model of entrepreneurship.

    Some influencers have responded by building teams earlier: bringing in managers, accountants, even production partners to professionalise their operations. Others are more protective, keeping things intentionally small to preserve their autonomy.

    This isn’t just a story about cute outfits and morning routines. It’s a story about a new kind of business built at the intersection of aesthetics, intimacy, and commerce.

    From mirror to empire

    In many ways, the mirror is the new boardroom. What looks like personal style is often structured strategy. A girl filming a GRWM in her bedroom might be soft-launching a beauty line. A thrift haul could be a mood board for a future label.

    The playbook is being written in real time, one outfit at a time — and young women are at the centre of it.

  • How to Read a Brand Deal Like a Lawyer

    How to Read a Brand Deal Like a Lawyer

    Brand partnerships have become a central revenue stream for independent creators. For many, they’re the first sign that a personal project has matured into a business. But the document that arrives attached to a friendly email is rarely as benign as it looks. A collaboration agreement is a legal contract with consequences that can shape your income, your image, and your future commercial opportunities.

    Lawyers approach contracts as instruments of power: one side tries to secure as much of it as possible, the other side attempts to hold on to what’s theirs. Creators often forget they’re part of that negotiation. They sign quickly, grateful for the opportunity, and in doing so, sometimes give away far more than they realise.

    Approach the contract with the same care the brand’s legal team already has.

    Usage Rights: the Most Expensive Sentence You’ll Overlook

    Among the most consequential clauses are those governing “usage,” “licensing,” or “content rights.” This section determines how, where, and for how long the brand can use the work you create.

    A one-off post can quietly become a year-long global advertising campaign. Your face, voice, or likeness might be used to sell a product on platforms you don’t control, with no further payment.

    Look for language such as “in perpetuity,” “royalty-free,” or “worldwide usage.” These are signals that the brand wants long-term control without additional compensation. Unless that’s reflected in the fee, those terms should be challenged or narrowed. Usage rights should always be specific — ideally tied to a platform, a territory, and a defined duration.

    Exclusivity: The Clause That Locks You Out

    Many contracts include exclusivity periods, restricting creators from working with competitors for a certain time. The risk isn’t theoretical. A single vague clause can prevent you from accepting better offers later, or block collaborations with brands you’ve spent months cultivating.

    Demand clarity. What counts as a “competitor”? How long does the restriction apply? Is it tied to one category, or does it cast a wider net? Ambiguity here benefits only the brand. Precise language protects your future revenue.

    Payment Terms: Numbers Are Not the Whole Story

    The fee written in the contract isn’t the amount that matters — the timeline is. A five-figure deal can become a financial strain when it’s paid on a 90-day schedule. Payment terms are a form of leverage, and late or drawn-out schedules often shift that leverage away from the creator.

    Push for clear, short payment timelines. Net 15 or net 30 is standard for many independent contractors. Where possible, request a partial payment upfront. The earlier the cash arrives, the less operational risk you carry.

    Deliverables and Approvals: Where Delays and Scope Creep Live

    Every contract should state, in exact terms, what you’re delivering and what the brand can request in return. Loose language here can turn a simple campaign into weeks of unpaid labour.

    A sound agreement includes:

    • The number and format of deliverables
    • Specific posting dates or deadlines
    • Defined rounds of feedback and revisions
    • Response times for approvals

    Without these parameters, creators often find themselves stuck in an approval cycle that burns through time and profit margins.

    Indemnity and Liability: Clauses That Few Read, But Should

    The most intimidating paragraphs are usually the most important. Indemnity clauses allocate legal risk — sometimes entirely to you. If a product fails, if a campaign is pulled, or if the brand faces a claim, these clauses can determine whether you’re financially exposed.

    A balanced contract protects both parties. If the indemnity is one-sided, push for language that limits your liability to your own actions, not the brand’s. This is where legal advice pays for itself.

    Everything Can Be Negotiated

    Many creators assume contracts are fixed. They are not. They are drafts — often written to secure maximum protection for the brand, not a fair balance. Even minor adjustments can have long-term financial impact. Changing “in perpetuity” to “12 months” or adding a clear exclusivity window can preserve future earnings.

    Brands expect questions. The ones who don’t are often the ones you shouldn’t work with.

    Read Slowly. Assume Nothing.

    A contract is an allocation of power, not a formality. If you don’t understand a clause, ask for clarity. If the language is vague, tighten it. If something looks lopsided, it probably is. Independent creators operate in a landscape where legal support is often absent by default, but silence at this stage can be expensive later.

    Reading a brand deal like a lawyer doesn’t require a law degree. It requires an appetite for detail, a refusal to rush, and an understanding that your work has value long after the campaign ends.