An Ethical Dilemma in Influencer Marketing: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

On a panel hosted by AAF Los Angeles that I moderated about Trust & Transparency: The Ethics of Influencers with representatives across the industry (Omari McNeil, Mylen Yamamoto Tansingco & Kylen Chen-Troester). this exact topic came up.

What the Law Says: The FTC’s Expectations for Influencers

The Federal Trade Commission Endorsement Guides § 255.1 (a) state that "Endorsements must reflect the honest opinions, findings, beliefs, or experience of the endorser." Meaning that an influencer can not/should not promote a product or service that 1) they have not personally used and/or 2) speak positively about products they didn't honestly enjoy.

The core objective of the FTC is to protect consumers, so this rule makes sense in that context. Consumers are willing to spend their hard-earned money when an influencer they like and trust promotes a product, ranging from makeup to cars.

With that type of influence, they (the influencer) should understand and appreciate the immense responsibility they have.

When Truthfulness Collides with Human Needs

But at the end of the day, this is their livelihood. It's how they put a roof over their head, it's how they put food on the table, keep the home warm in the winter and cool in the summer,. It's how they protect and feed their family. It's how they pay for tuition to for their kids to go to college. It's how they pay for medical bills when God forbid there's an emergency.

Mylen Yamamoto Tansingco pointed out the importance to remember we all have needs as human beings, and following Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, we know that without our physiological needs (food, water, shelter, clothing) and safety needs (employment, resources, health) being met, the rest is irrelevant.

Behavior vs Regulation: Beyond the Influencer

We see the battle between needing to have our basic needs met while following laws and regulations in our lives every single day. In America, we have to look no further than the unhoused crisis. A reality my family is all too familiar with.

For a range of reasons we find our neighbors and loved ones living on the street in encampments, but across the country we see growing regulations to destroy and prevent encampments without any legitimate alternative being offered to those who need it the most. These individuals who find themselves in this situation are faced with the reality of breaking the law or having nowhere to sleep, a physiological need at the very core of our human needs (accordinging to Maslow's Hierarchy).

The Human Side: Livelihoods, Bills, and Trust

The FTC Endorsement Guidelines make it clear: You must only endorse products you've actually used/enjoyed. But, what happens when the influencer is living paycheck to paycheck, at risk of their electricity being turned off, or their WiFi, a tool required for their job? What happens when they can't feed their family?

If an offer comes across for a product that they may not enjoy, but it's not a bad product, is it ethical for them to promote it? Is it legal?

The counterpoint to this is the trust their audience puts in them. Going back to my earlier comment that influencers have a great responsibility to be truthful with their audience, because their audience will listen. The power to influence someone to purchase a product is not something that can be brushed off, we must address it as part of this larger conversation around the ethics of influencers.

When an influencer promotes a) too many products or b) products they don't personally use or enjoy, the trust with their audience begins to erode. And that trust is vital to the value the influencer brings to the brands who want to work with them. As soon as the trust is gone between the influencer and their audience, brands have no reason to work with them.

And consumers are smart. They will call influencers out when it's clearly a deal that was done for money rather than the honest enjoyment of the product.

The Ethical Crossroads: No Easy Answers

And thus, we end up in this ethical dilemma.

Like any ethical dilemma, this requires an ongoing discussion, with clear (and valid) arguments on both sides of the table. A discussion I deeply look forward to having.