The cosmetics brand Lush has abandoned several of its social networks. “In a better place” can now be read on his Instagram profile. It is the last to announce it, but not the only one. Bottega Veneta did the same in January 2021 and Balenciaga has re-established its publications on several occasions. A risky choice, which experts believe will be seen again in the future, but will not become a trend. “Some brands do have this hanger, but the numbers indicate the opposite: Of the 3,000 million euros for digital investment, 26% has gone to social networks. Four percentage points more than the previous year ”, says Javier Galilea, president of the IAB Spain social networks commission
The motivations behind these actions are very diverse. While Bottega Veneta is still present through brand ambassadors and Balenciaga comes or goes depending on the campaign, Lush refers to the mental health of its followers, a topic that has gained special relevance this year. “In the same way that the evidence on climate change was ignored and belittled for decades, concerns about the serious effects of social networks are hardly recognized,” the brand reported in a statement.
The news comes a couple of months after it leaked that Facebook (now Meta) knew and ignored for years that Instagram was harmful to the mental health of its users. Thus, 32% of the adolescents surveyed recognize that the platform has worsened their relationship with their body and has contributed to increasing levels of anxiety and depression. “If you spend the day consuming a certain canon of beauty, of success, you may end up constantly comparing yourself and obsessing over it. wellness. It is dangerous for young people, but also for adults ”, comments a psychologist Gabriela Paoli. This is why the brand has decided to turn its back on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and WhatsApp, while staying on Twitter, YouTube and Pinterest.
For EAE Business School professor Glòria Vallès, this is a completely coherent move for the brand. “Activism is in their DNA. What they want is for customers to relax, and the use of the networks goes against their philosophy ”, continues the expert. This is also pointed out by Mark Constantine, CEO and co-founder of the company: “I have spent my entire life avoiding putting harmful ingredients in the formulas of our products. Now I am not willing to expose the people of the Lush community to this damage, so I have to take action. ” But for the strategy to work, the brand itself must also be consistent: “It would not make sense for them to now campaign with influencers“, qualifies the EAE professor.
The brand estimates that in the short term it could lose 10 million pounds due to this decision, a cost that, they say, they are willing to assume. But the movement is framed within a cultural change, confirms Esic professor Marcos Blanco: “Even the US Business Roundtable insists that the objectives of companies must change. It is no longer just about adding value to the income statement, but also to the community and everything behind. That may mean that sometimes less money is made, but it is a very important change in mentality ”.
While some firms dispense with certain platforms because they do not have the resources to maintain them, in this case, it is a clear brand positioning. “For them it is not beneficial because they leave the ones that will surely be more profitable for them,” acknowledges Blanco. In any case, for Vallès, Lush is one of the few companies that can run the risk of not being present on the networks: “If the brands have a lot of notoriety and a branding very strong, this movement can be considered as long as it is consistent with the values it promulgates; if they are not sure, it is a dangerous maneuver ”.
Although Paoli advocates the power of brands to promote a more responsible use of networks, without the need to abandon them. “It could be used to make an awareness campaign on a healthier use of them. Here we speak of social responsibility, that each one, from the place they occupy, can transmit that message. They can become true virtual platforms to transform our way of consumption without affecting our mental health ”, says the expert in technological addictions.
But Lush says it will stay away from these platforms until they take steps to mitigate the damage they can cause: “We don’t want to wait for global regulations to improve or for better practices to be introduced while a generation of young people is growing up experiencing serious damage. and durable ”. Some brands, Galilea points out, promoted the StopHateForProfit campaign in 2020, refusing to buy advertising on Facebook after the platform failed to show a blunt response to the boom in hate speech during the protests over the murder of George Floyd. An initiative that, for Lush, is insufficient: “It is not enough for companies to stop placing paid advertising. People and their time are the currency of these channels and we do not want our content to be used by algorithms designed to keep people hooked on their channels ”.
Future
The other side of the coin of social networks, however, is the visibility they provide at a very low price, which is especially attractive for smaller companies, which will remain there, according to Vallès. In the future, the EAE professor points out, “we are going to see more brands that do it, but always taking this aspect of values into account and only when it has a clear purpose behind it.”
– .
