or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope) - Page 790

post #11836 of 13765
Thread Starter 

I think that we have to adequately define "influencer" and what it means to have influenced a decision.

 

For example, while I am not at all influenced anyone's look, I am influenced by peer recommendations.  I certainly can't say that I would have found Stephan Schneider or SNS Herning without having read about them here on the forum.  And I'm reasonably sure that Engineered Garments and Wings+Horns would not be as popular on the forum as it is without my having championed it in the early years.  Does this make me both an infliencer and one of the influenced?  Or are we talking about something much more specific?

 

fwiw, I get emails on the official Sty;leforum account all the time refering to us (or rather, the forum, as a whole) as an "influencer".

post #11837 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

I think that we have to adequately define "influencer" and what it means to have influenced a decision.

For example, while I am not at all influenced anyone's look, I am influenced by peer recommendations.  I certainly can't say that I would have found Stephan Schneider or SNS Herning without having read about them here on the forum.  And I'm reasonably sure that Engineered Garments and Wings+Horns would not be as popular on the forum as it is without my having championed it in the early years.  Does this make me both an infliencer and one of the influenced?  Or are we talking about something much more specific?

fwiw, I get emails on the official Sty;leforum account all the time refering to us (or rather, the forum, as a whole) as an "influencer".

Wasn't one of the early tenets of forums to get away from shilling products by having peer recommend what they like, are they suddenly infliuencers because everyone is one nowadays. I'm thinking more of people being paid due to a actualized marketing strategy of getting the products oout. I'm also thinking of getting an elite to sell products to the masses and I'm not sure this works as much as we'd think or pr people wish it did. Once again it is much nicer to arrange for a party with 10 cool people with 5 million followers than to actually reach everyone on styleforum through boring means.
post #11838 of 13765

I would guess Kanye is pretty mild compared to what goes on with K-Pop stars, they most likely have way more influence given where the buyers come from nowadays and how cultish parts of that culture are. Don't know how to be more specific without getting a little racist.

post #11839 of 13765
Influencer marketing is just brands identifying people who help shape consumer decisions and paying them to promote something. It's a terrible development in fashion media cause it creates all sorts of dishonest content, but I don't think anyone can deny it works.

If it's just some random person recommending X brand to a friend, that's not really being an influencer. If someone has a large audience and people pay attention to what he or she wears/ does, that person might be considered an influencer. If a brand pays that person in some way (free clothes, money, etc) to promote their stuff, that would be influencer marketing (as part of their business strategy).

Really, this is just part of a larger movement where the lines between editorial and advertising gets continually blurred -- magazines building out their own online shops, brands paying for fashion spreads or IG photo appearances. Again, I think it's awful, and fashion media should be a lot more honest, but if we're discussing whether it works, that seems undeniable. People consume fashion media; that media affects decisions.
post #11840 of 13765
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear 

There's still "influencer marketing" that's a bit more honest -- people wearing or promoting stuff because they believe in it. I'd like to see a professionalization of ethics where that happens more, and the kind of advertoria/ shillingl stuff is God awful, but if we're just talking about the dynamic of how the process works, it's been around for over a hundred years. It's just that it's now much more part of business strategy.

I understand where this sentiment comes from.  But at the same time, it seems wrong for Ralph Lauren or Adidas or whatever to reap $$$, while some relatively poor #influencer, whether it's a professional athlete or an instagram star, is not allowed to benefit from their own clout.

post #11841 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

It's really the same thing though.

All influencer marketing is a business strategy to move into spaces that have traditionally affected people's consumer behavior.

The classic example is Hollywood red carpet, where stars used to wear their own clothes, but now borrow stuff on loan from brands who want publicity. I don't think that stuff is that relevant for menswear, but the dynamic is the same. Companies have taken the avenues where people have taken cues on how to dress and commercialized it -- paying people to wear stuff, doing partnerships, etc.

There's still "influencer marketing" that's a bit more honest -- people wearing or promoting stuff because they believe in it. I'd like to see a professionalization of ethics where that happens more, and the kind of advertoria/ shillingl stuff is God awful, but if we're just talking about the dynamic of how the process works, it's been around for over a hundred years. It's just that it's now much more part of business strategy.

Buying something cause you saw it on a musician or actor you like isn't that different from buying it because you saw it on a street style celebrity or whatever.

Were the Ramones trying to sell my a VansonXJunya leather though, they just went to a store and bought regular American made jackets yrs ago without any strategy from the brands.Sure the culture n a wider way influences our choiuces but that just isn't the same.
post #11842 of 13765
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by accordion View Post
 

I would guess Kanye is pretty mild compared to what goes on with K-Pop stars, they most likely have way more influence given where the buyers come from nowadays and how cultish parts of that culture are. Don't know how to be more specific without getting a little racist.

It's not racist.  Some cultures just have more developed cultures of the cult of personality.  And selling in different cultures is simply different.  How something is marketed in China vs. Japan vs. the USA are all, by necessity, different.

post #11843 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by accordion View Post
 

I would guess Kanye is pretty mild compared to what goes on with K-Pop stars, they most likely have way more influence given where the buyers come from nowadays and how cultish parts of that culture are. Don't know how to be more specific without getting a little racist.

post #11844 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

I understand where this sentiment comes from.  But at the same time, it seems wrong for Ralph Lauren or Adidas or whatever to reap $$$, while some relatively poor #influencer, whether it's a professional athlete or an instagram star, is not allowed to benefit from their own clout.

But aren't those people making money as well? Influencers (bloggers, Instagram celebrities, you tube stars, etc) typically work out some kind of deal in advertising based upon the number of hits. So while every #influencer may not get paid or even get that much free swag, it's generally linked to the amount of #influencer power they have.

Also, in technology today, there's direct ways of linking what an influencer is capable of doing for a brand. Be it re-directs to a brand's website, sales generated after that, etc. There's metrics for all of that. So if it wasn't working, it would actually be measurable, for the most part at least. But this is mainly talking about web-based #influencers, not necessarily about others who maybe have a big following but aren't very big online.
post #11845 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

I understand where this sentiment comes from.  But at the same time, it seems wrong for Ralph Lauren or Adidas or whatever to reap $$$, while some relatively poor #influencer, whether it's a professional athlete or an instagram star, is not allowed to benefit from their own clout.

You can have honest fashion media though, where people disclose their relationships.

It's hard to navigate the current media world using old media rules because marketing isn't exactly the same. We don't always have clean "layouts" where it's clear that advertising is on this column and editorial is on this column. We have things like Instagram, for example, where it's just a photo. And those IG accounts aren't run by a huge company where there's separate ad and editorial depts (useful for keeping interests separate); it's the same person.

But you can have better and worse degrees of honesty. What that means is still developing, but take it to the extreme -- if you have totally unabashed shilling, people lose trust in your opinion. It's just shilling at that point. There is a lot of fashion media I consume that doesn't really affect my decisions at all because I know that person is a mouthpiece for a brand. There's other fashion media I consume that I take more seriously, because I trust that person's opinion. Trust is really at the heart of it, and once you completely sell out to a brand, you break that trust with your audience.

There's stuff now that's just so, so bad. People not only taking free products to write or photograph something, but nowadays, asking that they be paid to create content. So it's not just the free product, it's also getting paid to write/ shoot something. How can anyone's opinion be trusted in that kind of environment?

I think disclosures help, but the strict boundaries around this stuff is still being worked out, IMO. The one site I write for, Put This On, we have a policy where any product reviewed has to be returned (I ask for companies to pay for return shipping). I think that's a good policy.
post #11846 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Were the Ramones trying to sell my a VansonXJunya leather though, they just went to a store and bought regular American made jackets yrs ago without any strategy from the brands.Sure the culture n a wider way influences our choiuces but that just isn't the same.

I don't see why the dynamic is any different, to be honest. If Lewis paid the Ramones to wear the jacket, you probably would have still bought it. Or at least many people would. At this point ,that's what's happening with Kanye. Adidas paid him to promote their shoes. He wears it; kids buy it. It's an old, old dynamic (dress like your cultural heroes). It's just that fashion companies are now directing that behavior instead of having it develop organically.
post #11847 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

You can have honest fashion media though, where people disclose their relationships.

It's hard to navigate the current media world using old media rules because marketing isn't exactly the same. We don't always have clean "layouts" where it's clear that advertising is on this column and editorial is on this column. We have things like Instagram, for example, where it's just a photo. And those IG accounts aren't run by a huge company where there's separate ad and editorial depts (useful for keeping interests separate); it's the same person.

But you can have better and worse degrees of honesty. What that means is still developing, but take it to the extreme -- if you have totally unabashed shilling, people lose trust in your opinion. It's just shilling at that point. There is a lot of fashion media I consume that doesn't really affect my decisions at all because I know that person is a mouthpiece for a brand. There's other fashion media I consume that I take more seriously, because I trust that person's opinion. Trust is really at the heart of it, and once you completely sell out to a brand, you break that trust with your audience.

There's stuff now that's just so, so bad. People not only taking free products to write or photograph something, but nowadays, asking that they be paid to create content. So it's not just the free product, it's also getting paid to write/ shoot something. How can anyone's opinion be trusted in that kind of environment?

I think disclosures help, but the strict boundaries around this stuff is still being worked out, IMO. The one site I write for, Put This On, we have a policy where any product reviewed has to be returned (I ask for companies to pay for return shipping). I think that's a good policy.

Isn't transparency in advertising what the below is for?

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking
post #11848 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

I don't see why the dynamic is any different, to be honest. If Lewis paid the Ramones to wear the jacket, you probably would have still bought it. Or at least many people would. At this point ,that's what's happening with Kanye. Adidas paid him to promote their shoes. He wears it; kids buy it. It's an old, old dynamic (dress like your cultural heroes). It's just that fashion companies are now directing that behavior instead of having it develop organically.

Well we wear chucks in large parts because of the ramones but they wore keds, that's kinda where I'm going there. Also wo kind of idiot puts Kanye's style at that level? Ok I'm kidding pop culture is pop culture, hierarchies are horizontal not vertical so I may have absorbed them but I don't truly believe in them when I put on my social sciences hat.

note: all typing mistakes are wine related. Sowwy
post #11849 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by winston86dit View Post

Isn't transparency in advertising what the below is for?

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking

Yea, but realistically nobody follows that and it's never prosecuted. And fashion media is somewhat international (although still mostly based in the US). For IG, some of the biggest influencers are abroad.

I think there are biases all over the place if you're creating content. Maybe you're friends with the owner of a brand, or you get your info some X source and don't want to break relationships. So even if you're not taking money or whatever, you might still have your biases. It's hard to create completely objective content, but you can be better or worse at your work.

I know some content creators who will literally say anything if you pay them. In fact, some won't even say anything until they're paid -- meaning, even if they like what you do, they won't promote you until you pay them. It's ridiculous.

If you're creating content, I think the best you can do is try to be as honest as possible. I work for a guy who takes media professionalism really seriously, so I think that's helped me learn the importance of this stuff, but for some guys who are just starting out, I think it's really easy to slip and let your opinions be swayed by all sorts of things.

One of the worst things to come out of this, I think, is a cynical part of the internet who think everything is shilling. It's like extreme political groups who think every politician is corrupt because a few have been caught. It creates a lot of disillusionment and cynicism that I think then makes it hard to create any kind of content, even good stuff.
post #11850 of 13765
Quote:
Originally Posted by dieworkwear View Post

Yea, but realistically nobody follows that and it's never prosecuted. And fashion media is somewhat international (although still mostly based in the US). For IG, some of the biggest influencers are abroad.

I think there are biases all over the place if you're creating content. Maybe you're friends with the owner of a brand, or you get your info some X source and don't want to break relationships. So even if you're not taking money or whatever, you might still have your biases. It's hard to create completely objective content, but you can be better or worse at your work.

I know some content creators who will literally say anything if you pay them. In fact, some won't even say anything until they're paid -- meaning, even if they like what you do, they won't promote you until you pay them. It's ridiculous.

If you're creating content, I think the best you can do is try to be as honest as possible. I work for a guy who takes media professionalism really seriously, so I think that's helped me learn the importance of this stuff, but for some guys who are just starting out, I think it's really easy to slip and let your opinions be swayed by all sorts of things.

One of the worst things to come out of this, I think, is a cynical part of the internet who think everything is shilling. It's like extreme political groups who think every politician is corrupt because a few have been caught. It creates a lot of disillusionment and cynicism that I think then makes it hard to create any kind of content, even good stuff.

Anyone who sees corruption as an individual problem shouldn't have an opinion anyway, they're not at the level for it. I remember being asked by a pol (now prime minister) to talk about ethics and corruption to some young peeps and I asked him if he thought his people were born more corrupt than swedish people, we did have an "interesting" conversation. Thereis a fashion system and it favours shilling. I know people who spend alltheir time parting and pushing for journalists to put their clients products in mags, what do you think happen, it is allone big fashion orgy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Random fashion thoughts - Part II (A New Hope)