Does deinfluencing pose a real risk to brands? We ran a test to find out.
TL;DR
- Swayable’s persuasion science platform found that trending #deinfluencing TikToks can be highly damaging to brand favorability and purchase intent among consumers.
- The most impactful #deinfluencing videos caused a ~20-point reduction in brand favorability and a 17-point reduction in purchase intent.
- #deinfluencing videos that focused on product quality issues and customer service were most impactful.
- #deinfluencing videos that pitched a competitor/alternative product were less impactful but still caused 3-6 point reductions in brand favorability and purchase intent.
2023: The year of deinfluencing
2023 witnessed the rise of a new social media trend: #deinfluencing. Rather than constantly promoting products, some influencers are building followings by dissuading followers from buying certain products, especially items that have gone viral on TikTok. The biggest targets of deinfluencing are some of the most ubiquitous influencer-driven brands and products.
With brands projected to spend over $7 billion on influencer marketing and TikTok Shop looking to become the new Amazon, consumers are increasingly using the app as both a source of consumer recommendations and direct purchases. At the same time, more and more influencers are incorporating a “deinfluencing” strategy to build trust among their followers and dissuade purchases of overhyped products that aren’t worth the money.
Does deinfluencing pose a real risk to brands? Or is it just a way for influencers to appear more authentic to their followers? At Swayable, we set out to answer that question using our message testing platform. We found that some #deinfluencing content caused greater reductions in Brand Favorability and Purchase Intent than any asset we have tested this year (over 1,500 assets). These findings suggest that brands need a strategy to defend against the major damage #deinfluencing can do to a brand’s bottom line.
Key findings
Deinfluencer videos were highly effective at persuading consumers not to buy Stanley and Dyson products.
-
The most impactful #deinfluencing videos caused a ~20-point reduction in brand favorability and a 17-point reduction in purchase intent.
-
9 of the 10 #deinfluencing videos we tested caused a reduction in Brand Favorability or Purchase Intent, ranging from 3 to 21 points.
Some of the most persuasive deinfluencer videos had the least amount of engagement on TikTok.
- The two most persuasive videos (“Kaili” and “Ali”) had 19 to 21 point reductions in Brand Favorability, but they had fewer than 100 likes at the time we ran this test. Ali also had the smallest following, with only 15,000 followers.
- In contrast, the video with the highest engagement (“Vivian”) only had an 8-point reduction in brand favorability and purchase intent, placing it in the middle of the videos we tested.
The most persuasive deinfluencer content didn't suggest dupes.
- #deinfluencing videos that pitched a competitor/alternative product were less impactful but still caused 3-6 point reductions in brand favorability and purchase intent.
These are results for each test on Brand Favorability and Purchase Consideration & Intent. The colored bars show how the average of each metric changed due to the content. 4 of the 5 Dyson Air Wrap #deinfluencing videos reduced Brand Favorability. Two of these were highly impactful with >10-point reductions.
These are results for each test on Brand Favorability and Purchase Consideration & Intent. The colored bars show how the average of each metric changed due to the content. 5 of 5 Stanley Tumbler #deinfluencing videos reduced Brand Favorability and Purchase Intent. One of these videos was highly impactful, with nearly 20-point reductions in Brand Favorability and Purchase Intent.
Video length & engagement did not influence persuasion
Across the over 1,500 assets we have tested in the past 12 months, we generally find that longer videos have a greater persuasion effect. In this case, we saw that some longer videos were persuasive, and others were not. We can see that the length did not guarantee persuasion.
In addition, we found that engagement metrics were not correlated with impact. The 3 most effective videos all had fewer than 2,000 likes. Meanwhile, the most popular video (“Vivian”) caused a -8 point impact on Brand Favorability, making it the 5th most impactful video we tested. The second most popular video (Sahana) did not impact Brand Favorability.
Product quality and customer service complaints drove impact
If engagement and length did not drive impact, then what drove it? The Swayable platform also includes qualitative answers to open-ended questions in addition to our quantitative metrics. The open-ended responses suggest that product quality and customer service are major drivers of impact.
In the “Ali” video, she goes to do her hair, and the Dyson attachments fall off. She also shared that Dyson’s customer service had not responded. Respondents pointed to that as the most memorable part of the video:
“When the attachments would simply not stay on the device! Whichever piece she attempted to demonstrate kept falling off at the slightest vibration!” – 65-year-old woman from PA
“When the lady said that Dyson had not responded, that was very disappointing as a customer to me.” – 30-year-old woman from NC
Similarly, the “Kaili” video tells an extended story about poor customer service from Stanley. Again, respondents noted poor customer service and quality as being most memorable:
“Letting us know that the Stanley cup wasn’t worth the $50, because it scratches easily, leaks, doesn’t hold cold, they don’t uphold warranty, and customer service sucks.” – 49-year-old woman from VA
“Her listing the issues with customer service, particularly the responses they gave to justify sub par service and quality control.” — 29-year-old woman from CO
Promoting alternate products was not as effective
In both “Ali” and “Kaili”, the influencers largely refrain from promoting alternative products. In contrast, many of the other videos suggested competitive products to buy instead. “Sayble”, “Vivian”, and “Anna Newton” all suggested alternatives to the Stanley Quencher, even suggesting alternative Stanley products. In the Dyson test, “Kodi Rose”, “Sahana”, and “Dani Kristina” suggested much cheaper, lower-tech alternatives, such as a brush and blow dryer.
We hypothesize that suggesting alternatives actually reduced the negative brand favorability impact of these videos. First, some people may have tried those alternatives and found them wanting. In addition, suggesting that viewers spend money on something could subliminally increase purchase intent of the very product they are “deinfluencing.”
Results were largely consistent across many demographic segments
The Swayable platform also includes breakdowns of many demographic segments. We found that in most cases, the results in the segments were largely similar to the overall results. The negative impact caused by these videos was largely shared across most of the participants:
Stanley #deinfluencing: 18-24 year olds
Stanley #deinfluencing: Tiktok Users
Dyson #deinfluencing: 18-24 year olds
Dyson #deinfluencing: Tiktok Users
How should brands respond?
Swayable research shows the #deinfluencing trend has the potential to harm brand perceptions and consumer purchase intent. However, not all videos are created equal in this regard. We believe that brands should adopt a 2x2 risk matrix: persuasiveness vs reach.
Brands should vigorously respond to #deinfluencing videos from creators with large followings that also have the hallmarks of being highly persuasive: they focus on customer service and quality concerns without promoting alternative products.
By applying this framework, brands can focus their efforts on real threats, as opposed to every critical video on the feed. While this framework is broadly useful, brands should consider using Swayable to test #deinfluencing content that is specific to their brand. This can show if there are unique trends in their market that they need to be aware of as they craft an effective response.
At Swayable, we have extensive experience working with leading brands and political campaigns that have adopted competitive/opposition testing to prioritize and respond to critical threats. While we might like to respond to every critique, we must recognize the reality that we don’t have the time or money to do so. It’s essential to know what poses a real threat.
Interested in learning more?
To learn more about our methodology or view the source material, check it out here.
Interested in a live demonstration of Swayable's powerful brand monitoring technology? Contact shane@swayable.com to see how Swayable can work for your brand's needs. Implementation can be done in just a few days.