Ch. 12 (Unit 5B) Advertising Current Articles

Article #1

Why Do Beauty Brands Post About Politics? Links to an external site.

By Jennifer G. Sullivan. November 21, 2023

There’s a face serum I really like, but I just saw the brand post about a political cause that doesn’t align with my values. I’m thinking of not purchasing from them again, but I’m also curious about why brands and founders do these public posts if they know it might lose them customers. What do you think I should do? —Anon.

To answer the easier part of your question: If a company supports causes that don’t align with your values, you can absolutely stop buying its products. And if you’re worried about finding a replacement serum, don’t be Links to an external site. (as much as beauty brands would like you to believe otherwise, the majority of skin-care products aren’t unique; with an open mind and some sampling Links to an external site., you’ll be able to find something comparable). But I get the sense that you’re uncomfortable with the fact that the brand took a stance at all — and you’re trying to understand why they did. You’re not alone.

About six in ten Americans say they think it’s inappropriate for companies to take a stand on political, social, or cultural issues, according to a recent CNBC poll Links to an external site.. But younger shoppers tend to believe they should, and values-based shopping is becoming the norm. In fact, 85 percent of shoppers want a brand’s values to align with their own, and 75 percent reported parting ways with a brand over a conflict in values, according to Harris Poll’s research commissioned by Google Cloud Links to an external site..

As you noticed, a brand’s social accounts will often give you some idea of its political leanings. Cluey Links to an external site., a website and browser extension that helps consumers find brands that align with their values, is another way to learn more. And you may want to dig deeper in your research: It’s possible that a company’s investors or executives support causes you don’t necessarily believe in Links to an external site.. Does that bother you? If so, the list of brands you buy from will get even smaller. Just have a little grace for yourself as you contemplate all this and adjust your shopping habits — and have some grace for other people who are doing the same. Your values may change over time, and you don’t have to set any hard rules for yourself right now. Another great thing about being a private citizen? You don’t have to publicize your purchase decisions or why you make them — unless you want to, of course.

Businesses don’t necessarily have that same freedom. And this gets into the trickier part of your question: Why do brands post about social or political causes? I spoke to a few marketing and public-relations executives, and the consensus was that many companies no longer have a choice. They’ll get called out for trying to play both sides of an issue, and they’ll also get called out for silence. For example, in June 2022, days after the Supreme Court eliminated the constitutional right to an abortion Links to an external site., beauty-industry watchdog Instagram account @esteelaundry posted Links to an external site., “Many beauty brands are supporting the fight for abortion rights. Which companies have not taken a stance after the overturning of #roevwade Links to an external site.?”

“Brand neutrality is a thing of the past. There’s really only one option: Pick a stance, and stick with it,” says R Public Relations Links to an external site. founder Emily Bergh Reynolds, who has a certificate in crisis communications from the Public Relations Society of America. As you noted, the downside is that a brand will probably lose some customers. But, says Reynolds, the upside is that they “may secure even more loyalty from consumers and attract new audiences who agree with their positions on social and political issues.”

I don’t know what the company that makes your serum posted about, but my guess is that its executives did not come to the decision lightly. They also had to distill a complicated topic into a post, and — understatement of the century here — the complexities of many political and social causes are lost on social media. (I’m not saying this should change your position in any way; I’m just trying to help you make sense of their decision.)

As I contemplate your question, I keep coming back to something Karissa Bodnar, the CEO of Thrive Causemetics Links to an external site., told me on my podcast Links to an external site. a few years ago. I asked her a question that touches on some of the issues you bring up now: What happens if your company supports a charity or cause that offends part of your customer base? Her response was, “There are certain social issues that some people deem political, like Black Lives Matter and LGBTQ+ rights. I don’t think those are political issues. I think that those are human-rights issues. And I think for me, personally, it’s important to take a stand in that moment. Do I always know what to say? Absolutely not. Am I perfect? No. Have we made mistakes? Yes. But am I going to do my best to stand up for causes and initiatives that I believe in? Absolutely.” As values-based consumerism becomes the norm, I think we’re going to see more brands and their executives opening up to consumers and being transparent about their values and the choices they make — and that’s a good thing.

Sure, there are plenty of problems with capitalism Links to an external site., but to some extent, the companies most likely to succeed will be the ones that give customers what they want. And the fact that you’re thinking about where and how to spend your money means you are, in some small way, making an impact on how beauty brands do business.

The anti-predictions: Here’s what won’t happen in advertising in 2024 Links to an external site.

By Digiday Editors • January 2, 2024

This article is part of a series exploring trends in marketing, media and media buying for 2024.

We know it’s that time of the year when everyone starts making predictions. But let’s face it, most of those guesses are either way too cautious or way off the mark. Well, at Digiday, we’re doing something different. Take a look at our take on what’s not in the picture as we welcome in the new year.

Esports won’t die — but 2023’s esports winter might become an ice age in 2024

For the past year, competitive gaming has been surrounded by a narrative of doom and gloom Links to an external site.. As some brands pull away from spending Links to an external site. in the space, esports teams’ over-reliance on brand partnerships Links to an external site. has become glaringly apparent, making it increasingly urgent for esports companies to carve out more sustainable revenue streams Links to an external site..

In spite of these stumbling blocks, however, the core product of competitive gaming remains incredibly popular. Viewership is continuing to rise, and the esports companies that survive the inevitable consolidation of 2024 could reap the rewards as esports and gaming fandom becomes truly mainstream. — Alexander Lee

Publishers won’t see any big, immediate gains from the collapse of third-party tracking

Publishers had high hopes that the end of widespread tracking would put them back in the driver’s seat, finally allowing them to profit from their audiences. However, it turns out this isn’t a guaranteed win – at least not yet. There are numerous hurdles to overcome before publishers can truly seize control. Most importantly, the industry needs to agree on what tracking without third-party cookies will actually look like. Right now, it seems like it will involve a variety of identity solutions, not just one. Authenticated IDs, based on user consent within a publisher’s domain, are promising, but their true value in the market remains uncertain. So, while publishers had dreams of immediate gains, they may have to wait a bit longer for the reality to catch up. — Seb Joseph

A U.S. federal privacy law won’t arrive in 2024; the delivery of Privacy Sandbox looks tenuous (even if Google says it’s business as usual)

In 2024, the long-awaited U.S. federal privacy law and Google’s Privacy Sandbox are unlikely to materialize, creating frustration within the industry. Privacy concerns have loomed large in the online advertising sector throughout the 2020s, initially triggered by the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulations in 2016. These regulations forced the industry to seek explicit user consent for targeting and tracking, a departure from the earlier era of unchecked data collection.

Subsequently, individual U.S. states introduced their privacy laws, most notably the California Consumer Privacy Act in 2018. Apple also played a significant role by implementing privacy measures, starting with Intelligent Tracking Prevention in Safari in late 2017.

Additionally, the 2024 U.S. general election makes bipartisan support for national privacy legislation unlikely, meaning lobbying efforts may continue into 2025. — Ronan Shields

Marketers won’t walk the talk on media transparency

This year, marketers have been all about media quality and journalism, nary missing a moment to sound off on the matter in interviews and industry events. But when things got real, like digging into how much money is squandered on programmatic advertising, it was crickets. Look at the fuss about ad-centric sites or the ANA’s peek into the programmatic supply chain — almost total radio silence from the marketing crowd. The thing is, marketers seem to either be turning a blind eye to these issues or they’re just not in the know enough to realize their impact. Whatever it is, change isn’t coming any time soon. Marketers have too many other things to worry about, from keeping ahead of third-party cookies being clipped to the emergence of AI. Media transparency always plays second fiddle to the latest trend. — Seb Joseph

Amazon won’t be the be-all end-all of retail media

For a long time, when you heard “retail media,” you immediately thought of Amazon. It’s been the undisputed leader in this growing market. But things started to shift in 2023, and 2024 will really reemphasize the change. More advertising dollars will be pouring into competitors like Walmart, Kroger, Instacart, and others. This shift will have significant ripple effects, including labor implications, how companies allocate their portfolios, a growing need for expertise, changes in media spending, and even uncertainty about who will come out on top in this evolving landscape. Interestingly, part of this change is due to bureaucratic shifts. The Amazon budget, once handled by the e-commerce team, is now merging with the digital budget. This reflects a trend of ecommerce and marketing teams working more closely together or even merging entirely. So, Amazon won’t monopolize retail media like it used to. — Seb Joseph

Netflix won’t gobble up TV ad dollars

Remember when Netflix said it would start running ads? There was this big buzz that ad cash would flood in. Well, surprise, surprise — it didn’t. The first year of Netflix ads was arguably underwhelming. It played it safe, and had a limited audience to pitch to advertisers. And guess what? That’s likely how it will be for their second round in the ad game too.

Sure, Netflix probably gets more subscribers willing to watch ads. But honestly, it might not be enough to match the jaw-dropping prices it’s asking for. And that’s despite the fact that the streamer plans to add more bells and whistles to its ads business over the coming months, from private marketplaces for its programmatic ad inventory to new formats. No, if anything, next year’s ad scene on Netflix will probably be a repeat of the cautious tone from the first one. — Seb Joseph

Big advertisers won’t return to X

Since billionaire Elon Musk acquired then-Twitter in October 2022, advertisers have been pulled from pillar to post. Sure he’s always been transparent about his dislike for advertising, which is why hiring NBCU’s Linda Yaccarino to smooth out those relationships, seemed like a smart idea.

However, after 13 months under Musk’s ownership, the relationships have been completely severed. Musk’s controversial actions and statements have made it untenable for big advertisers to maintain their connections, regardless of Yaccarino’s involvement. She no longer serves as a bridge for them to feel comfortable investing their ad dollars. Particularly, concerns regarding brand safety, antisemitism and misinformation on the platform are mounting. — Krystal Scanlon

Apple won’t launch a DSP

Sorry to break it to you ad tech pals. But Apple’s not dropping its much-awaited demand-supply platform next year. Why the hold-up? Well, it would be risky to spin it up while there’s a cloud of uncertainty over whether regulators will be able to wrangle Google’s own ad tech play. And let’s face it, Apple doesn’t have to rush into the ad world like Netflix did. Look at its slow moves into search ads — slow and steady. True, Apple has assembled teams and developed technology to try and exert more control over search ad dollars should the opportunity present itself. But don’t count on it becoming a certified competitor to search anytime soon. Maybe later, though. If regulators shake up Google’s search ad game, Apple might have to react, given they’ll lose a truckload of cash. Same goes for ad tech — Apple’s more about necessity than greed. — Seb Joseph

Article #3

AI is the end of brands as we know them Links to an external site.

The recent Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity revealed how artificial intelligence will force us to find new ways of seeing if we’re to adapt to this new paradigm shift.

BY REI INAMOTO. 6-27-2023

“Whenever the word AI was mentioned in a case study, the jury cringed.”

One juror told me about his experience inside the jury room at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity Links to an external site. on the French Riviera last week. This year, to no one’s surprise, AI was the talk of the town.

Back in 2013, right after Cannes Lions, I wrote an op-ed piece for Fast Company called “The End of Advertising As We Know It Links to an external site.,” based on what I was observing then. I described a paradigm shift in marketing that I thought would occur because of technological, societal, and behavioral changes.

These changes didn’t kill advertising. Instead, they forced it to mutate over time.

Ten years on, advertising isn’t advertising anymore. This year, much of the award-winning work at Cannes Lions wasn’t what one would consider ads in the traditional sense. They were cloaked in or disguised as something other than ads. “Knock Knock” for Korean National Police Agency, “The First Digital Nation” for Tuvalu, or “Runner 321” for Adidas were grand prix winners of various categories—but to call them ads or campaigns would be a misnomer. “Advertising needs a new name,” Scott Galloway Links to an external site. told a packed auditorium at the Festival.

The landscape has shifted so much that an individual can now have more sway than an institutional brand. A brand can also be lifted up to new heights or brought to its knees by an individual.

It may be the end of brands as we know them.

Based on what I have observed at the Festival and elsewhere, here are a few principles that can guide the next paradigm shift.

FROM ORGANIZATIONAL SCALE TO FUNCTIONAL SPEED

Galloway writes in his blog post Links to an external site. that “[American football] Hall of Fame player Jerry Rice wasn’t that fast, but he had ‘functional speed,’ the instincts to accelerate or decelerate when it mattered most.”

Take Adobe, for example. In just a few months, it introduced Firefly Links to an external site., a prompt-based generative AI tool incorporated within Photoshop. Adobe, an old and possibly stale software giant, accelerated when it mattered, demonstrating its relevance as a brand.

It is important to note, however, that functional speed doesn’t belong just to tech giants like Adobe.

When I asked my friend Pum Lefebure, cofounder and chief creative officer of Design Army Links to an external site., about her recent AI-generated campaign, “Adventures in A-Eye” for Georgetown Optician, what struck me most was the speed.

For this, instead of briefing her team to come up with it, Pum used Midjourney to produce the concept by herself. In a week or so, she presented nearly finished work. A few weeks later, the campaign launched. Typically, the process to develop something of this caliber would take several months. AI allowed her to collapse the process from four months to four weeks.

Moving forward, AI will enable companies of all sizes and individuals to scale and speed themselves in ways that weren’t possible before, rendering organizational scale less praiseworthy than previously.

FROM TRANSACTION TO CONVERSATION

One of the key touch points between brands and people online is e-commerce. The entire process—from product selection to payment—is transactional. However, when asked what people value most in their customer experience and will pay more for, “friendly service” and “knowledgeable service” score as high as “efficiency” and “easy payment.” Conversations are highly suited for delivering friendly and knowledgeable services.

It’s already possible for us to have fairly natural conversations with AI on just about anything. In the next few years, it will be entirely possible for machines to provide friendly and knowledgeable services that are as good as, if not better than, those provided by humans in the form of conversations.

Aim for effectiveness, not just efficiency, in every transaction with your customer.

FROM USP TO POV

Not too long ago, Ayako Tanaka, a Japanese fashion Instagrammer Links to an external site. with a modest following of 168,000 followers, sold close to $1 million worth of products she curated during a two-day pop-up event. That’s the kind of revenue that a major global brand would sell in a day or two at its flagship store.

Major brands may have superior products with better unique selling propositions (USP). However, it’s Tanaka’s POV that followers are attracted to and buying into, resulting in this kind of sales figure.

Many brands try to express their point of view. Patagonia proclaiming that Earth is its only stakeholder Links to an external site. is one excellent example, while Mastercard Europe helping Ukrainian refugees with “Where to Settle Links to an external site.”—another piece of work winning big at Cannes—is another instance of a company putting money where its mouth is.

On the contrary, when a brand doesn’t stick to its POV, it can be far more damaging than it would have been a decade ago, as we saw in the case of a transgender influencer and a brand Links to an external site. that relied on her but didn’t support her.

The mistake wasn’t not having a POV. Rather, it was not sticking to it.

FROM GENERATIVE AI TO HUMAN TOUCH

While AI was by far the dominant topic in Cannes, there was little evidence that it has materially made the work better. When AI was mentioned in the context of creative endeavors, people were quick to mention efficiency, not quality or originality. That’s an Achilles’ heel for creativity.

“McEnroe vs. McEnroe” for AB InBev’s Michelob Ultra Links to an external site. is one example of the use of AI that wasn’t possible five years ago. It takes past data in order to regenerate the moves of tennis player John McEnroe from the past and lets the real McEnroe play against himself. Humans, not AI, came up with a seemingly impossible idea and used AI to make it possible.

PJ Pereira Links to an external site., an old colleague of mine and AI optimist like me, says, “The last turn [in the creative process] needs to be yours,” referring to what takes work from good enough to great.

In 2016, AlphaGo beat Lee Se-dol, the South Korean Go champion, 4 to 1. In Game 2, the AI program surprised Lee—and the world—with its so-called move 37, which humans thought was a mistake at first but turned out to be a decisive move in beating Lee. “This move was really creative and beautiful,” Lee would later say.

In the one game where Lee beat AlphaGo, it was his “hand of God” play, the 78th move, which perplexed the AI program. In a sense, the machine gave Lee “a new way of seeing the game,” as depicted in one scene of the documentary, AlphaGo Links to an external site..

In sum, AI might not kill brands—or creativity for that matter—just yet. However, it’ll force brands to mutate over time, and us to adjust our ways of thinking and working.

Not only has AI collapsed the space between your idea and execution, but so has the influence between institutions and individuals. Building a brand has now become accessible to anyone and everyone. That is why it also has gotten that much more competitive. Fiercely so.

When we don’t hear the mention of AI anymore, that’s when we know technology has diffused itself throughout our industry, whatever that may be.

Article #4

Zara pulls ad campaign that critics said resembled Gaza destruction Links to an external site.

December 12, 2023. 3:03 PM ET By Diba Mohtasham

The fashion brand Zara apologized after its latest ad campaign, called "The Jacket," was widely criticized as tone-deaf and insensitive for evoking the destruction in Gaza.

Although the campaign was conceived in July and photographed in September, many customers felt the release of the photos last Thursday, during the war, was insensitive. The Israel-Hamas war broke out on Oct. 7.

In the ads, a model stands surrounded by mannequins, some missing limbs and others covered in white plastic shrouds, which critics said looked like corpses. Some drew a comparison between the cloth in the ad and a typical Muslim burial shroud.

The Israeli offensive in Gaza was launched in response to the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas militants that killed 1,200 people, Israeli says. Since then, more than 18,000 have died in Gaza, including many women and children, according to the Gaza health ministry.

In an Instagram post Links to an external site. shared Tuesday, Zara acknowledged that some customers were offended by the images and said they have been removed from the website.

The company said it regrets the misunderstanding and that the campaign was intended to present "a series of images and unfinished sculptures in a sculptor's studio and was created with the sole purpose of showcasing craftmade garments in an artistic context."

"We affirm our deep respect towards everyone," the post continued.

The controversy prompted some pro-Palestinian activists to call for a boycott of the multinational retail clothing chain, the latest in a series of social media-fueled boycotts during the war. #BoycottZara began trending this week on X, formerly known as Twitter.

This is not the first time Zara has fallen under scrutiny for being anti-Palestinian. In 2021, the company's head designer for the women's department, Vanessa Perilman, was criticized for comments she made on Instagram Links to an external site. to Palestinian model Qaher Harhash, saying, "Maybe if your people were educated then they wouldn't blow up the hospitals and schools that Israel helped to pay for in Gaza."

In a statement later posted online, the company responded Links to an external site. that it "does not accept any lack of respect to any culture, religion, country, race or belief. Zara is a diverse company and we shall never tolerate discrimination of any kind."

Article #5

The lie of “deinfluencing” Links to an external site.

Influencers will never influence us to buy less stuff. It’s antithetical to the job.

By Rebecca Jennings Nov 14, 2023, 6:00am EST

An illustration shows a woman reaching out from a giant phone to hand several shopping bags to another woman.

For about five minutes a few months ago, people seemed to genuinely believe that our culture was entering the age of “deinfluencing.” “Step aside, influencers Links to an external site.,” wrote CNN Links to an external site.. “A new breed of ‘deinfluencers’ has arrived, and they’re saying that materialism and overpriced trends are no longer in style.” The idea of the “deinfluencer” was that instead of encouraging you to buy stuff, the influencer would encourage you to ... not buy stuff.

At first, many videos tagged “deinfluencing” were genuine appeals to push back against influencer culture; people talked about how overspending and viral haul videos were part of an unsustainable and unethical system of capitalism that moved at the speed of TikTok Links to an external site. trends, often including mea culpas about how their own videos had contributed to that system. It was pretty interesting, honestly, to hear people whose livelihoods depend on selling other people’s products reflect publicly on what their job has meant for the mental health Links to an external site., spending habits, and ethics of both themselves and their viewers.

What started as a rare glimpse into what professional salespeople truly feel and believe, however, immediately became a rather ingenious sales pitch once the hashtag caught on: Instead of influencing people to buy stuff, influencers who tagged their posts “deinfluencing” were simply posting negative reviews of products they didn’t think were worth the money, and — more often than not — telling you what to buy instead (one was captioned “showing you products that can potentially help with overconsumerism!”)

Did anyone really think a TikTok trend was the beginning of the end of capitalism? Probably not. In the months since “deinfluencing” faded from the discourse, TikTok has made consumption on its platform even more inescapable with the launch of TikTok Shop, a feature allowing viewers to buy a product shown in a video without leaving the app. TikTok Shop videos — recognizable by the orange shopping cart tag next to the description — are everywhere, and they are leaving people’s TikTok feeds “in shambles.” Links to an external site. TikTok has always been full of product-hawking, much of it rather sneaky: You might be watching a video of someone doing their makeup and they happen to name the brand of mascara they’re wearing Links to an external site., or a lifestyle influencer is showing her newly renovated living room and suddenly all the commenters demand to know where she bought her lamp. (If she says no, that’s gatekeeping Links to an external site.! Even the very language of the platform encourages consumption!) The app was already full of cheap, unethically made goods from sites like Temu or AliExpress, but TikTok Shop has made it even easier for people to buy them and much more lucrative to sell them.

Still, stories about how “influencing is over” have proliferated ever since influencers have existed. It happened when the FTC Links to an external site. sent warning letters to influencers saying that they needed to include advertising disclosures on all of their sponsored posts, and the mainstream media predicted this would torch their ability to come off as relatable and authentic (the effect was the opposite Links to an external site.). It happened when influencers were called out for promoting disastrous music festivals Links to an external site., it happened when Instagram added the option Links to an external site. to hide “like” counts on photos, and it happened when the pandemic forced everyone inside Links to an external site..

Yet so far, nothing has come even remotely close to slowing the influencer economy. By all metrics, the industry is growing: The number of content creators is expected to grow at a 10 percent to 20 percent compound rate during the next five years, according to Goldman Sachs Links to an external site.. The market Links to an external site. is on track to rise from $16.4 billion in 2022 to $21 billion in 2023, and advertisers are spending less in traditional media and more on influencers Links to an external site. because young consumers tend to trust influencers over brands Links to an external site. and social media over national news outlets Links to an external site.. The definition of “influencing” has continually expanded, not contracted; what started as the province of consumer categories like fashion, beauty, travel, food, and fitness now includes political activism, literature, music, art, corporate life, dating, and mental health. If it exists, there are influencers for it.

The result is that the internet now feels like a place whose sole purpose is selling you something. And it’s not going to change — in fact, it’s going to get much, much worse. That’s according to both the logic of growth-at-all-costs capitalism and also Michael Serazio, journalist and communications professor at Boston College and author of the new book The Authenticity Industries: Keeping It “Real” in Media, Culture, and Politics, Links to an external site. out this November. In it, he explores the commodification of identity, why “selling out” has no meaning anymore, and why amateurs — that is to say, regular people on social media — make the most effective salespeople.

“The vast majority of content we consume when we’re on social media is by amateurs as opposed to professionals, and that’s a dramatic shift in terms of how we’ve gotten our media content over the years,” he says. “The notion of the amateur is that they’re doing it for love and not for money; they enjoy the creative expression, they have no ulterior motives. That has created the expectation in audiences that these folks are trustworthy, and that’s exactly what makes them valuable to then sell on behalf of marketers and corporations.”

Tech platforms, he explains, have long profited from the notion Links to an external site. that their users are people who are only there because they’re having fun. Marketers for tech companies claim that social media is a more democratic alternative to traditional media, with its gatekeepers and top-down approach to information and culture (meanwhile, they gloss over the fact that they’ve simply replaced those human gatekeepers with black-box algorithms that no one understands yet govern everything we see). Highly visible and successful influencers complicate that image, which is part of why platforms and influencers have paradoxically always been at odds with one another Links to an external site.. Marketers, however, love influencers, who have the sheen of “regular person just doing this for fun,” even when they’re making money at it. And whenever there is a cultural pushback against influencers’ “too polished” aesthetics Links to an external site. or cynical cash grabs Links to an external site., it’s not as though the whole industry collapses: It simply shifts to accommodate whatever aesthetic takes its place. The attention and the ad money might be going to different creators or different platforms, but wherever people are supposedly being “authentic” on the internet, the money will follow.

“Advertising is geographically imperialistic,” says Serazio. “It’s always seeking out new spaces that it has not yet colonized. There’s a constant craving among users for something authentic, pure, and not trying to sell you something. But wherever you find that, it will wind up being filled in, a product will be inserted into it.”

It’s a never-ending cycle, he says, which has over the past few years led to a sense of disillusionment among audiences. “The internet isn’t fun anymore,” Kyle Chayka declared in the New Yorker Links to an external site. recently, pointing to Google Links to an external site. searches cluttered with ads and SEO bait, Facebook Links to an external site.’s baffling quests to capitalize on the latest tech crazes, and whatever’s happening with the mess that is Elon Musk Links to an external site.’s takeover of “X” (formerly Twitter Links to an external site.). “The social-media Web [sic, lol] as we knew it, a place where we consumed the posts of our fellow-humans and posted in return, appears to be over,” he writes. Instead, it’s been filled by “anonymous trolling, automated recommendations, [and] runaway monetization schemes.”

With all of this degradation of internet spaces that once felt freer and more fun, it’s almost shocking that there really hasn’t been any widespread pushback. Sure, plenty of people have aired their grievances with social media and the worsening experience of being online, but they’re doing so on social media because on the current version of the internet, where else can you go and actually be heard? Similarly, as much as millennials and Gen Z say they distrust capitalism Links to an external site., are interested in anti-work ideology Links to an external site., and support socialist policies Links to an external site., in a cutthroat, individualist economy, no one without significant privilege can realistically opt out. “To complain about ‘selling out’ is a privileged thing to do,” says Serazio. “Once the music industry’s revenue model was completely decimated, you didn’t hear anyone complaining about selling out anymore.” The same is true for the labor economy writ large: For his Gen Z college students, Serazio says, the concept of selling out has no meaning whatsoever; the goal is to sell out, even though they may criticize the system it upholds.

Young people know that where there’s money to be made, people will find a way to make it, and if it’s not you, it’ll be somebody else (watch any of the millions of YouTube videos directed at young men on how to make “passive income” Links to an external site.). Given the chance to shill a random company’s possibly useless product for a few thousand bucks, very few young people will say no Links to an external site.. After all, it’s the surest way of becoming a professional influencer, still one of the most sought-after jobs among kids Links to an external site.. Seventy percent of content creators say Links to an external site. brand sponsorship deals are the top way they make money, followed by sharing ad revenue with tech platforms, affiliate links, and starting their own brands — all of which depend on selling products to consumers.

As long as this system exists, advertising and marketing will continue to fill in the gaps like weeds. And if we think the internet is colonized by ads now, it’s not going to get better. “Having studied this for two decades or so, I will say that whatever we think of as really commercialized right now, we will look back nostalgically on in five or 10 or 20 years as being so much less commercialized, so much more pure and Edenic,” Serazio says. “I know it’s crazy to think, but it’s just an abiding truth we’ve seen over time.” The influencers are just a symptom, and by virtue of the literal job description — make money by taking sponsorship deals from consumer brands — they’re not the ones who will be lighting the way toward an online anti-capitalist backlash. Instead, it will show up like wildflowers among the weeds, poking out in private group chats, niche newsletters, or studiously gatekept forums. An internet where everything is built on scale, where each pixel of digital real estate is up for grabs by the highest bidder, is an internet where only influencers, billionaires, and scammers win out. It’s an internet that will continue to suck until it’s not worth using at all.