Pinto’s Column

The Anti-Haul That Flipped the Script on Consumerism

Part 1: The Last ‘Add to Cart’: The Age of Peak Influencer Before the correction, there was the bubble. The period leading up to 2023 represented the zenith of influencer…

Part 1: The Last ‘Add to Cart’: The Age of Peak Influencer

Before the correction, there was the bubble. The period leading up to 2023 represented the zenith of influencer marketing, an era defined by a single, dominant mantra: “buy, buy, buy.” Social media platforms, particularly TikTok, had morphed from spaces for connection into the world’s most efficient, and relentless, marketplaces.1 This was the age of the #TikTokMadeMeBuyIt phenomenon, a time when a 30-second video could send a product into sell-out stardom overnight.2 The influencer marketing industry had swelled into a $21.1 billion behemoth, built on a powerful new economic engine.4

The #TikTokMadeMeBuyIt Machine

At the heart of this engine was a simple, potent feedback loop. A highly visual, fast-paced algorithm showcased an endless feed of “get-ready-with-me” routines, massive PR-provided “hauls,” and seemingly ubiquitous “unboxing” videos.2 This content was not just entertainment; it was a direct pipeline to consumption. The data confirmed its efficacy: 55% of TikTok users admitted to making a purchase after seeing a product on the platform, and 41% had considered buying directly from the app.3 Social media was no longer a place to simply see what your friends were doing; it was a place to be told, relentlessly, what you should be buying.

The Psychological Weight of the Feed

This constant barrage of commercialism carried a heavy psychological burden. Consumers, particularly younger generations, were marinating in a digital environment where the average American was exposed to an estimated 5,000 advertisements per day.6 This saturation led to a state of collective “influencer fatigue” 7, a profound and growing exhaustion with being perpetually “sold to”.8

This fatigue was compounded by the anxiety the platforms were engineered to create. The influencer economy was largely powered by “Fear of Missing Out” (FOMO), a psychologically unsettling state characterized by the anxiety of being left out and the perceived need to be constantly connected.10 This anxiety, fueled by endless comparisons to “perfect” and unrealistic images 12, created a distorted perception of reality.8 The implicit message of every “must-have” product and “holy grail” recommendation was that your life, as it was, was incomplete.

The Gathering Storm: A Crisis of Trust and Economics

This psychologically fraught system was already unstable, but two external factors—one economic, one social—emerged to create a perfect storm, setting the stage for an inevitable backlash.

First, the economic reality of the global audience shifted dramatically. A severe cost-of-living crisis, driven by “erratic inflation” 13, meant that “casual influencer-induced retail therapy” was no longer casual, nor was it therapy. It was a source of profound financial anxiety.13 Audiences, whose disposable income was evaporating, found themselves in a state of cognitive dissonance: they were being aggressively sold expensive, non-essential products they could “no longer afford”.16 The “euphoric rush” of an impulse purchase 13 was being rapidly replaced by “buyer’s remorse”.17

Second, the core currency of the influencer economy—trust—was in a state of collapse. This was a “crisis of trust and insincerity”.12 Audiences grew increasingly cynical of the “sea of sponsored content”.18 They felt misled by undisclosed ads, which 26% of consumers distrusted entirely.19 They became aware of the rampant use of beauty filters in product reviews, rendering them useless.20 Decades of overexposure to marketing and “greenwashing” had left consumers, especially Gen Z, skeptical of all corporate messaging.21 Even the hashtags intended to build trust, like #ad or #sponsored, had lost their power; 57% of consumers said those labels did not increase their trust.19

The influencer economy of late 2022 was, therefore, an unsustainable model. It was built on a foundation of perceived authenticity that it was actively destroying through over-monetization. It was pushing a message of hyper-consumption to an audience that was running out of money. The “hype bubble” was straining, and it was about to burst. De-influencing was not a random trend; it was the inevitable market correction.

Part 2: ‘Don’t Buy This’ — The Rise of the Anti-Haul

The correction arrived swiftly and decisively. Born on TikTok 22, the “de-influencing” movement erupted in early 2023, flipping the script on a decade of consumerist content.3 It was an antidote 23, a collective rejection of viral, cult-favorite products.16 And it was, itself, virally popular.

The TikTok Tipping Point (Early 2023)

In January and February 2023, creators began to flock to the platform to “debunk the allure of certain hyped or cult products”.23 The hashtag #deinfluencing, which stood at 113.4 million views in February 2023 23, exploded, skyrocketing to nearly 730 million views by mid-2023 and 1.3 billion by January 2024.18

The format was simple and cathartic. Creators like Lauren Rutherglen, a Calgary-based user, gained thousands of new followers by making a video that served as the antithesis of a haul.16 Instead of promoting “must-haves,” she rummaged through her drawer of expensive but disappointing products—the very items the internet had convinced her she needed. She did not mince words. Of a creamy eyeshadow, she said, “It dries out, it’s hard to blend. I hate it. I hate it so much”.16 Another viral product, she claimed, “literally smells like rotting Play-Doh”.16

This brutal, specific, and un-brand-friendly honesty was precisely what audiences were craving. It was a direct response to the “cluttering and over-population” of markets like beauty.23 One creator, Elle, captured the movement’s ethos perfectly in a video: “As a general rule of thumb, I don’t think you need anything from someone that looks like me on TikTok telling you that something you hadn’t heard of thirty-seconds ago is an absolute necessity”.23

The Genealogy of “No”: From Anti-Haul to De-Influencing

This movement, while appearing novel in its 2023 TikTok iteration, was the spiritual successor to an older, quieter trend: the “anti-haul”.2 Years earlier, on YouTube, creators like Kimberly Clark had pioneered the #AntiHaul movement.24

An “anti-haul” is the direct opposite of a haul video; it is a “conscious choice not to buy things you don’t need”.5 Clark’s original videos were a form of mindful consumption, explaining to viewers why she was not buying certain new beauty products, often because they were “just a recycled version of last season’s trend”.24

De-influencing took this foundational concept and supercharged it. It married the anti-haul’s critical premise with TikTok’s hyper-viral algorithm and, most importantly, infused it with the new, raw urgency of the global cost-of-living crisis.16 It was no longer just a lifestyle choice; it was a financial and ethical imperative.

Case Studies: The De-Influenced Hall of Shame

The products targeted by de-influencers were not random. They were symbolic. To de-influence these specific items was to topple the idols of the #TikTokMadeMeBuyIt religion. They were the crown jewels of influencer hype: expensive, “cult-favorite” 16, and inextricably linked to a “must-have” aesthetic.2

The message was clear. By proving that these specific, “holy grail” items were “overhyped, overpriced, and not worth the money” [Query], the de-influencing movement was holding a mirror up to the entire system. It was a collective declaration that “the Emperor has no clothes”.23

Part 3: The Psychology of ‘No’: In Authenticity We Trust

The explosive popularity of de-influencing cannot be explained by economics alone. The trend’s true power lies in its deep psychological resonance. It tapped into a profound, collective exhaustion and offered a form of liberation. It succeeded not just because it saved people money, but because it gave them something they craved even more: authenticity, and the “permission not to want” [Query].

The Great Trust Collapse

At the core of the de-influencing phenomenon is a “crisis of trust”.12 The traditional influencer model, based on monetization through paid partnerships, had systematically eroded its own foundation. This “trust gap” is quantifiable and stark:

This data paints a picture of a consumer base that feels “tired of aggressive marketing from influencers and unrealistic promises from brands”.1 They have become acutely aware of the “authenticity paradox”: the content feels personal and relatable, but it is, in fact, a “calculated performance” 40 and a “sales pitch”.8 This realization that they are being manipulated by “fake influencer reviews” 1 and undisclosed ads has created a deep-seated cynicism.

Authenticity as the New Social Currency

De-influencing was the antidote to this cynicism. Its “brutal honesty” 13 became the “newly coveted trend”.8 In an ecosystem saturated with “unrealistic, perfect images” 12, a negative review was “refreshing” and “stands out in a sea of sponsored content”.18

The psychology of this is simple: positive reviews are ambiguous. Is the influencer saying they love the product because they genuinely love it, or because they were paid? The intent is blurred. A negative review, however, is unambiguous. A creator saying a product “literally smells like rotting Play-Doh” 16 is engaging in an act that is explicitly not brand-safe and not monetizable. This perceived “anti-commercial” stance signals true honesty. This act of telling the truth, even when it’s ugly, rebuilds the trust that sponsored content destroyed. For Gen Z in particular, authenticity is not just a preference; it is “the key factor” in their purchasing behavior.41

The Psychological Relief of “Permission Not to Want”

This is the most profound psychological driver of the movement. For years, the social media algorithm, powered by FOMO 10 and influencer marketing, operated by creating anxiety. It manufactured desire and consumer guilt 42 by relentlessly telling audiences, “You need this”.23

De-influencing was the first time the algorithm, hijacked by a trusted creator, broadcast the opposite message: “You don’t need this. You are not missing out. You have permission not to want.”

This message offered profound psychological liberation. It gave the consumer agency back.43 It validated their private feelings of financial anxiety and skepticism, reassuring them that resisting an impulse-buy was not an act of deprivation, but an act of intelligence and self-respect.8 It was a cultural correction that offered a “pause” 8 from the “add to cart” energy, and in doing so, provided a collective, algorithm-sanctioned exhale. It was the neutralization of FOMO as a marketing tool.

The Power of Altruism and Cognitive Dissonance

The most effective de-influencers weaponized a powerful psychological tool: perceived altruism. Unlike traditional influencers who use aspirations (buy this to be like me), de-influencers used altruism (don’t buy this, for the good of all).44

This works by creating cognitive dissonance.44 The process is as follows:

  1. A follower holds a core belief: “I am a good, ethical, and sustainable person.”
  2. A de-influencer creates a conflict: The creator links a viral product to an ethical failing. For example, “We’ve all learned about the human rights violations happening within the fast fashion industry” 25 or “fast make-up’ is very problematic as well” 25, or they frame the purchase as contributing to the 92 million tonnes of annual textile waste.5
  3. The follower must resolve the dissonance: The follower, who was about to buy that fast-fashion item, now faces a conflict between their action (buying) and their belief (being sustainable). To resolve this uncomfortable psychological tension, they align their action with their belief. They do not buy the product.

This altruistic framing 44, which focuses on the greater good rather than personal gain, makes the de-influencer appear to be a “trustworthy change maker”.44 This allows them to create deeper, more lasting behavioral changes than any traditional advertisement ever could.

Table 1: The Anatomy of a De-Influencing Driver

The de-influencing trend is not driven by a single factor, but by a “perfect storm” of converging psychological, economic, and cultural pressures.

Driver CategoryCore DriverAudience Manifestation (The Internal Monologue)Key Data Point / Evidence
PsychologicalAuthenticity Crisis & Influencer Fatigue“I’m tired of being lied to by #ad. I can’t tell what’s real. I just want an honest opinion.”53% of consumers distrust paid endorsements.39 80% distrust influencers they view as inauthentic.19
PsychologicalRejection of FOMO & Consumer Guilt“I feel anxious and guilty for wanting things I don’t need. I want permission to just… stop.”De-influencing offers a “pause” and a cultural correction to anxiety-fueling consumerism.8
Socio-EconomicFinancial Anxiety & Cost-of-Living Crisis“I literally cannot afford this $600 hair tool or $50 lipstick, and it’s stressful to see it promoted as a ‘necessity’.”Rising inflation and living costs are forcing consumers to prioritize essential spending and avoid “buyer’s remorse”.13
Cultural/EthicalSustainability & Anti-Consumerism“This is wasteful. I don’t want to participate in fast fashion or a trend that just creates more landfill.”The movement is a direct response to overconsumption 45, which generates 92 million tonnes of textile waste annually.5
Cultural/EthicalPerceived Altruism“This creator is being honest for the greater good, not for a paycheck. I trust them.”De-influencers are perceived as “trustworthy change makers” motivated by ethics, not personal benefit.44

Part 4: The ‘Buy This, Not That’ Paradox

Just as the movement seemed to promise a radical break from consumerism, a quiet irony emerged. The trend was co-opted almost immediately, with its “pure” anti-consumption message becoming diluted. The “authenticity” it championed was reverse-engineered as a new, more sophisticated marketing strategy. De-influencing, it turned out, was still influencing.45

“The Plot Was Lost”: How De-Influencing Became Influencing

The earliest and most genuine de-influencing videos had a clear, anti-consumerist message. Creators were “opening drawers and showing their 50 red lipsticks,” confessing they didn’t need or use them all.45 The call to action was simple and radical: “you don’t need another lipstick… save your money”.6 The message was to “buy less“.8

This pure message “quickly turned”.45 The trend “lost the plot” when established influencers began co-opting the format.45 Their videos adopted a new, subtler script: “don’t buy this hyped product, buy this one instead“.23

The anti-haul devolved into a recommendation engine for “cheaper or more effective alternatives” 23, or “affordable ‘dupes’”.45 The movement, which began as a critique of overconsumption, was “back to recommending an abundance of products again”.2 This shift demonstrated that the trend was not necessarily “a divorce from consumption entirely”.2 It was simply a redirect of that consumption.

“Authenticity as a Brand”: The Rise of Performative Critique

This co-optation revealed the “authenticity paradox” at the heart of the modern creator economy.8 As soon as “authenticity” became the “newly coveted trend” 8, it became a performance. “Being real” became a “strategic” and “calculated” performance of imperfection.40

Savvy creators and brands realized that “pseudo-authenticity” 18 could be a powerful marketing tool. The new, more subtle funnel works like this: an influencer builds immense trust by “de-influencing” Product A (a product they have no brand deal with). They earn credibility by appearing honest and critical. They then “spend” that credibility by recommending Product B (the “dupe” or “alternative,” for which they may have an affiliate link).

The audience, desperately seeking “scraps of realness” 8, often cannot distinguish between genuine, altruistic critique and a “calculated method to build trust for future monetization”.8 “Authenticity” itself simply became a brand.8

This creates an inverted, but perhaps even more powerful, marketing funnel. The old model was about “Awareness -> Interest -> Desire -> Action”.4 The new de-influencing funnel is “Distrust (of hype) -> Trust (in the de-influencer) -> Desire (for the “dupe”) -> Action (Buy)”. This model may be more effective. Data from CivicScience indicates that a negative product review sways purchasing decisions for 67% of social media users, while a positive review only sways 60%.49 By mastering the “negative” review, creators paradoxically became better salespeople.

The Hate Brigade: De-Influencing as Scapegoating

Finally, the trend’s co-optation revealed a darker, less productive side. The nuanced message of “mindful consumption” 45 often devolved into a “hate brigade on influencers”.45

This new format was defined by a “total lack of nuance”.45 A product was no longer “not right for my skin type”; it was “THIS PRODUCT SUCKS, INFLUENCERS ARE LYING TO YOU”.45 This flattened the conversation, ignoring the simple fact that different products work for different people.45 It also conveniently scapegoated influencers—who are often “just another cog in the big business marketing wheel”—as “The Big Man with all the money and power”.45 This shift conveniently removed responsibility from the brands creating the products and the consumers buying them, channeling all frustration toward the most visible target.

Part 5: The New Trust Economy: Beyond De-Influencing

While the de-influencing “trend” itself may have been co-opted, the forces it unleashed have permanently altered the consumer landscape. It was not an end to influencer marketing, but a forced evolution. It exposed the cynical, hype-driven model and accelerated the shift to a new “trust economy” 50, where authenticity and value are the only currencies that matter. This new reality, heading into 2025 and beyond, has clear winners, losers, and a new set of rules for all.

The Validation of the Micro-Influencer

The clear winners in the post-de-influencing world are micro-influencers. This trend was not a threat to them; it was a validation of their entire business model.18 While macro-influencers were trafficking in “hype,” micro-influencers were already focused on building tight-knit communities based on “real, unfiltered opinions” and authenticity.18

The data on their superiority in the new trust economy is overwhelming:

For these smaller creators, de-influencing was simply an extension of what they already did: being a trusted, relatable voice.18 They are the new power brokers in a marketing world that is “gravitating towards creators who admit a product isn’t worth the money”.18

The New Brand Playbook: Adapt or Become Obsolete

For brands, the de-influencing trend was a “terrifying” 51 but necessary wake-up call. The old playbook of “chasing virality” 52 and using influencers as “human billboards” 53 is now obsolete. To survive in the trust economy, brands must adopt a new, more transparent strategy:

  1. Embrace Honesty: Brands must move “from Hype to Honesty”.1 This means not fearing criticism or less-than-perfect reviews.52 Acknowledging a flaw or a valid critique demonstrates transparency and builds more credibility than a feed of exclusively positive, paid-for praise.52
  2. Prioritize True Advocates: The focus must shift from “one-off campaigns” to “long-term relationships”.52 Brands should partner with genuine brand fans and advocates who can speak with sincerity. These “strategic equals” 48 are far more valuable than a mega-influencer with a “lukewarm endorsement”.18
  3. Leverage Experts: A key strategy is to partner with credible, independent experts—such as dermatologists, dieticians, or financial experts—who have an ethical obligation to provide truthful, science-backed information.47 Their “stamp of approval” transcends trends and builds foundational trust.

The new ROI is not “Reach”; it is “Trust”.48 Brands that adapt to this reality by prioritizing authenticity, value, and long-term advocacy will thrive.52

The Future: From “No-Buy” to “De-Consumerism”

De-influencing did not happen in a vacuum. It is the most visible expression of a much larger, more permanent cultural shift toward “conscious consumption”.1 This new consumer mindset is defined by skepticism and a focus on value.17

This trend runs in parallel with several others, including:

The long-term future of this movement points toward the rise of “de-consumerism communities,” online spaces dedicated to sharing tips on mindful spending and sustainable living.17 It may even lead to “AI-powered de-influencers”—chatbots or tools that can analyze hype and tell a consumer whether a product is truly “worth it”.17

Conclusion: The Re-Negotiation of Power

De-influencing was not the “end” of influencer marketing. It was a messy, loud, and necessary re-negotiation of power.50 For a decade, brands and top-tier influencers held all the cards. But in 2023, the audience—armed with financial anxiety, ethical awareness, and a profound hunger for authenticity—called their bluff.

The de-influencing trend was the symptom of this power shift. The new, permanent reality is the “trust economy”.50 This shift has bifurcated the creator economy into two distinct, parallel paths:

  1. The “Hype” Economy: This path continues, but it is now correctly identified as pure entertainment. It is the world of celebrity brands 63, “fast fashion” 5, and aspirational escapism. Audiences will continue to watch, but with low trust and low conversion.
  2. The “Trust” Economy: This is where actual purchasing decisions will now be made. It is the world of micro-influencers 18, niche experts 57, and genuine brand advocates. It is slower, more critical, and built on proven value.

De-influencing was the moment the audience learned to tell the difference between the two. In doing so, they did not just change a trend; they changed the fundamental rules of the game. The creator-audience relationship has been permanently altered, and in this new economy, trust is the only currency that matters.

Works cited

  1. From Hype to Honesty: How Deinfluencing is Changing Consumer Culture – DepositPhotos Blog, accessed November 17, 2025, https://blog.depositphotos.com/deinfluencing.html
  2. Are TikTok’s de-influencing and anti-haul trends really challenging …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://mashable.com/article/tiktok-deinfluencing-antihaul-shopping-trend
  3. The Rise of De-Influencing on TikTok: Why Authenticity Matters More Than Ever, accessed November 17, 2025, https://blog.commissionfactory.com/affiliate-marketing/the-rise-of-deinfluencing-on-tiktok
  4. What Is De-Influencing, And Is It More Than A Trend? – The Good Trade, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.thegoodtrade.com/features/influencer-marketing-critique/
  5. Anti-Haul, Underconsumption, De-Influencing: Influencers Hated Words! – REFASH, accessed November 17, 2025, https://refash.in/blogs/quick-reads/anti-haul-underconsumption-de-influencing-influencers-hated-words-5
  6. Deinfluencing: just another trend or a new, more sustainable way? : r/ConsciousConsumers, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/ConsciousConsumers/comments/11yteag/deinfluencing_just_another_trend_or_a_new_more/
  7. Brands as drivers of social media fatigue and its effects on users’ disengagement: the perspective of young consumers – Emerald Publishing, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.emerald.com/yc/article/25/5/625/1226673/Brands-as-drivers-of-social-media-fatigue-and-its
  8. Is Deinfluencing Just Another Aesthetic? | Arts | The Harvard Crimson, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/6/6/deinfluencing-thinkpiece/
  9. Rise of de-influencing trend used discourages social media ‘influencers’ – CBS News, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/rise-of-deinfluencing-trend-used-discourages-social-media-influencers/
  10. The Psychological Effects of Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) on Consumer Behaviour with a Focus on Social Media – SciTePress, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2024/128177/128177.pdf
  11. The Psychological Pull of FoMO in Consumer Behavior: a Literature Review – ResearchGate, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387954613_The_Psychological_Pull_of_FoMO_in_Consumer_Behavior_a_Literature_Review
  12. accessed November 17, 2025, https://blog.depositphotos.com/deinfluencing.html#:~:text=Authenticity%20and%20honesty,perfect%20images%20and%20unmet%20expectations.
  13. The Rise Of Deinfluencing Will Change Brand Marketing As We …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.essence.com/news/money-career/rise-of-deinfluencing/
  14. The Price We Pay: the social impact of the cost-of-living crisis, accessed November 17, 2025, https://natcen.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-07/Society%20Watch%202023_The%20Price%20We%20Pay_the%20social%20impact%20of%20the%20cost%20of%20living%20crisis.pdf
  15. The cost of living crisis – how does it impact the health and life of individuals? A survey exploring perceptions in Italy, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom – PMC – NIH, accessed November 17, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11234749/
  16. No more clumpy lipgloss: How TikTok’s ‘deinfluencing’ trend became a marketing tactic | CBC News, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/deinfluencing-tiktok-trend-1.6755278
  17. How “De-Influencing” is Changing Consumer Behavior in 2025 | by …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://medium.com/@vibrantcontentbyv/how-de-influencing-is-changing-consumer-behavior-in-2025-62cbd1f86336
  18. The Impact of De-Influencing Trends on Micro-Creators, accessed November 17, 2025, https://stackinfluence.com/impact-of-de-influencing-trends-micro-creators/
  19. Consumers Trust Influencer Marketing Less Than Traditional Ads – Camphouse, accessed November 17, 2025, https://camphouse.io/news/consumers-trust-ads-more-than-influencers
  20. Deinfluencing: Is the end nigh for beauty influencers? – Dazed, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.dazeddigital.com/beauty/article/58131/1/is-the-end-nigh-for-beauty-influencers-deinfluencing-mascaragate
  21. Marketing in the Age of Skepticism: Why Consumers Trust Influencers More Than Brands, accessed November 17, 2025, https://dragonflydm.com/marketing-in-the-age-of-skepticism-why-consumers-trust-influencers-more-than-brands/
  22. accessed November 17, 2025, https://stackinfluence.com/impact-of-de-influencing-trends-micro-creators/#:~:text=De%2Dinfluencing%20is%20a%20social,and%20to%20resist%20excessive%20consumption.
  23. Unpacking Deinfluencing: The Latest TikTok Trend, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.influencerintelligence.com/blog/T8X/unpacking-deinfluencing-the-latest-tik-tok-trend
  24. Deinfluencing: A New Era of Authentic Marketing – CROING Agency, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.croing.com/post/deinfluencing-a-new-era-of-authentic-marketing
  25. The rise of the deinfluencer | Dazed, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/58129/1/the-rise-of-the-deinfluencer-tiktok-recession-overconsumption
  26. Hair Styling Tutorial – Dyson Airwrap 3 Ways | SYLVIE MEIS – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJWbO2PKPrk
  27. Dyson Influencers: See 38 Creators Who Promoted Dyson (Nov 2025) – Modash, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.modash.io/content-library/brands/dyson-examples/influencers
  28. After having the Dyson Airwrap for over a year here are my thoughts – Reddit, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/beauty/comments/s29j9u/after_having_the_dyson_airwrap_for_over_a_year/
  29. Is anyone buying the Dyson Airwrap? Please deinfluemce or influence me – Reddit, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Sephora/comments/1gj4rss/is_anyone_buying_the_dyson_airwrap_please/
  30. De-influencing you | Stanley Cup, Dyson Air wrap, Giant Skincare collections, Amazon Dupes – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-GPQRLcX-k
  31. Stanley Cup Overconsumption Is OFFICIALLY Out of Control – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsRUOF1og80
  32. THE STANLEY CUP PHENOMENON: WHY PEOPLE ARE LOSING THEIR MINDS | Influencer Insanity Ep 2 #stanleycup, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y95mC9y_Vq8
  33. Stanley cups: the psychology behind the internet’s latest obsession | Dazed, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/61710/1/the-psychology-behind-the-stanley-cup-craze-quencher-tumbler-tiktok-trend
  34. Stanley x LoveShackFancy – Stanley 1913 US, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.stanley1913.com/collections/stanley-x-loveshackfancy
  35. What Is Deinfluencing? Explaining the Viral Trend of Negative …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://fashionmagazine.com/style/shopping/what-is-deinfluencing-tiktok/
  36. 11 beauty products that went viral on TikTok in 2022 – Glossy, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.glossy.co/pop/10-beauty-products-that-went-viral-on-tiktok-in-2022/
  37. OVERRATED products *rightfully* DEINFLUENCING you for 2024 | tiktok viral skincare & makeup – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEfCB8AAieg
  38. 10 MOST OVERHYPED INFLUENCER BEAUTY “MUST HAVES” of 2024 – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vqi_cA4Bla4
  39. Why Trust in Influencers Is Declining — Trends & What’s Next …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://clutch.co/resources/trust-in-influencers
  40. Authentic Marketing and the Paradox of Being Real – Digital @ HEC Montréal, accessed November 17, 2025, https://digital.hec.ca/en/blog/authentic-marketing-and-the-paradox-of-being-real/
  41. The Impact of Influencer Authenticity on Purchase Intentions among Gen Z Consumers., accessed November 17, 2025, https://acr-journal.com/article/the-impact-of-influencer-authenticity-on-purchase-intentions-among-gen-z-consumers–1767/
  42. What is ‘De-Influencing’ and What Does It Mean for Brand Marketing? – Roseway Collective, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.rosewaycollective.com/blog/deinfluencing-and-brand-marketing
  43. “No-buy pledge” catches on with TikTokers. Here’s what to know and how to start. – CBS News, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/savings-spending-consumer-concerns-no-buy-pledge-tiktok/
  44. From promotion to prevention: the influence of de-influencers on …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311975.2025.2462271
  45. Everything That Went Wrong with the Deinfluencing Trend on TikTok, accessed November 17, 2025, https://creatingwithkaya.com/everything-wrong-with-the-deinfluencing-trend-tiktok/
  46. The Deinfluencing Trend Teaches Everyone To Combat …, accessed November 17, 2025, https://environment.co/deinfluencing/
  47. What is Deinfluencing? Unpacking the Latest Social Media Trend – Influencer Marketing Hub, accessed November 17, 2025, https://influencermarketinghub.com/deinfluencing-trend/
  48. Donetta Allen on Cracking the Authenticity Paradox in Influencer Marketing – The WIE Suite, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.thewiesuite.com/post/the-authenticity-paradox-why-influencer-marketing-works
  49. De-Influencer Marketing Holds an Edge Over Traditional Social Media Influencing, accessed November 17, 2025, https://civicscience.com/de-influencer-marketing-holds-an-edge-over-traditional-social-media-influencing/
  50. Deinfluencing: Why Transparency Is the Future of Influence — Ansira, accessed November 17, 2025, https://ansira.com/blog/deinfluencing/
  51. Should brands be worried about anti-overconsumption trends? – Creative Salon, accessed November 17, 2025, https://creative.salon/articles/features/tiktok-anti-overconsumption-deinfluencing
  52. What Is Deinfluencing and How Should Brands Respond? – Impulze.ai, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.impulze.ai/post/what-is-deinfluencing
  53. The Future of Social Media: Influencer Marketing Trends for 2025, accessed November 17, 2025, https://marketing.sfgate.com/blog/influencer-marketing-trends
  54. How to Avoid the Deinfluencing Trap in Marketing – Brandwatch, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/deinfluencing-marketing/
  55. Understanding the Deinfluencing Trend and Why it Matters – Fourthwall, accessed November 17, 2025, https://fourthwall.com/blog/understanding-the-deinfluencing-trend-and-why-it-matters
  56. Influencer Marketing in the Deinfluencing Era – Hoffmann Murtaugh, accessed November 17, 2025, https://hoffmannmurtaugh.com/blog/the-deinfluencing-era/
  57. How Brands and Creators Can Respond to the De-Influencing Trend – IZEA, accessed November 17, 2025, https://izea.com/resources/how-brands-and-creators-can-respond-to-the-de-influencing-trend/
  58. What is a No-Buy Year and Why is it Trending on Social Media? – Metro Credit Union, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.metrocu.org/blog/what-is-a-no-buy-year-and-why-is-it-trending-on-social-media
  59. Viral ‘No Buy Challenge’ helps Americans stop overspending – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnDZi9ii8Ww
  60. ‘No buy’ challenge: How to participate in new trend to save money – YouTube, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2VK9yE-UsA
  61. Social media trend encourages young people to buy less and reconsider their consumption, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/social-media-trend-encourages-young-people-to-buy-less-and-reconsider-their-consumption
  62. De-influencing is redefining consumer culture one ‘anti-haul’ at a time – The Queen’s Journal, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.queensjournal.ca/de-influencing-is-redefining-consumer-culture-one-anti-haul-at-a-time/
  63. 25 TOP BRANDS THAT WENT VIRAL THANKS TO INFLUENCERS IN 2025 – Amra & Elma, accessed November 17, 2025, https://www.amraandelma.com/brands-that-went-viral-thanks-to-influencers/

What did you think?

<
×

Enjoying the column?

Get the next article delivered to your inbox.