The managers of the largest and most important brands in Mexico reached an agreement: to veto the more than 100 influencers who, in the midst of the electoral ban, used their social networks to issue comments in favor of the Green Ecologist Party of Mexico (PVEM) . Even with ready-to-go campaigns, beverage brands and consumer products, they chose to cut their losses: they stopped strategies that were underway where these digital leaders collaborated, others decided to remove them from projects that were about to start and some more simply kept the banned list nearby to make sure you don’t include them in any projects.
These executives, who are in charge of safeguarding the image of brands and are the ones who make decisions about marketing budgets in companies, chose to close the doors to these characters. In addition to not wanting to relate to political issues or ‘splash’ with their bad image, they agree that they broke a basic rule of influencer marketing: demonstrate being consistent with what they say and do.
“90% of the brand managers of these big brands came together to say that it was in their hands to veto those influencers, so that none of them, as decision makers, collaborate with any of the people who lent themselves to the Party issue. Green for its lack of ethics ”, says Gerardo Sordo, founder and CEO of BrandMe, an agency that connects brands with content creators.
In this list, which according to the Twitter account @whatthefffake consists of 103 influencers, there are actors, singers, athletes and content creators such as Bárbara de Regil, Daniel Bautista, Celia Lora, Lambda García and Raúl Araiza, who on Saturday 5 of June – a day before the federal elections – posted content on Instagram encouraging their followers to vote for PVEM.
“It was very obvious,” says Sordo. “Precisely one day before the election, the Acapulco Shore (some members of the reality show were part of the campaign) talk about the party, when they had never done it before. These characters, who are admired by people, go out to give a message just to earn easy money hoping that the public will believe them, when the only thing that happens is that people perceive that they are treated as fools trying to deceive them ”.
“The audiences are not stupid, they are angry that they are not authentic. That is why the only thing that is caused by this is the loss of credibility, authenticity and followers ”, adds the expert.
The script the influencers used
For Ismael El-Qudsi, CEO of influencer marketing agency SocialPubli, the strategy had three main mistakes. The first has to do with the poor choice of digital leaders, because beyond the fact that they were selected for their affinity with the political ideology of the PVEM, it was made by the number of followers.
“It seems that they grabbed the list of profiles with the most followers, who do not necessarily have a recognized talent outside of being on television, they gave them money and they accepted. Many are profiles that do not care about what they will say, so it was easy to emit these types of messages. But this is precisely what causes credibility in his speech to be lost ”, adds Gerardo Sordo.
According to the ‘II Study of advertisers with influencers’, prepared by SocialPubli, for 52.6% of marketing professionals one of the advantages of using digital leaders is the generation of close and natural advertising with consumers.
However, for 39.6% of them the biggest challenge is to identify characters that are related to their company or brand, so the main characteristic they look at before hiring them is that they are consistent with their words and actions, and that its content is of quality.
In the case of those who participated in the PVEM campaign, none of these requirements is met.
“Before wanting to talk about a topic as a trainer or influencer, it is necessary to build credibility, inform yourself, research and devise how to introduce new content to the audience, in an organic way. Speaking without context or without prior construction can affect, as happened in this case, the image and acceptance of the character, “says Rodrigo Mantilla de Pablo, director of the digital marketing company and influencer marketing Passport Entertainment.
The second has to do with not indicating that they were participating in a paid campaign, since to make believe that it was something spontaneous was simply not effective, in addition to being unethical, according to the experts consulted. From SocialPubli they assure that for 77.8% of marketing professionals it is important that influencers indicate when it is a collaboration with a brand, since making it seem like something organic can affect the results of the campaign.
Ismael El-Qudsi says that just as brands look for real and honest influencers, people also want to follow characters who are consistent and transparent with them, since their rise in the digital world is precisely due to the fact that they are able to provide information on the that the Internet user trusts. When brands speak, people know that there is a sales motive behind them, when influencers make a recommendation it is as if a friend or acquaintance was giving them advice.
And the third mistake, the most serious, was violating the electoral law. “It would have been less scandalous if they posted their messages earlier, when allowed. Playing outside of politics is a serious mistake, ”says El-Qudsi.
Due to this, the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic (FGR) opened an investigation folder for the messages disseminated during the electoral ban, after it received a considerable number of complainants through its citizen service system on the content published by the influencers.
On the day of the federal elections, June 6, the National Electoral Institute (INE) issued a statement ordering the withdrawal of the PVEM propaganda campaign, also directly requesting Instagram and Facebook to remove the content that the political party referred to in the prohibited periods. by the law.
The electoral lawyer Christopher Marroquín Miter, partner in the legal firm Avila, Lozano y Rodal, explains that it will be the Specialized Regional Chamber, the Electoral Court of the Federal Judicial Power (TEPJF), which determines whether there is an infraction or not and what sanction corresponds to the political party.
“In general terms, the sanction can go up to 50% of the ministries that correspond to them by public financing,” mentions the former secretary of study and account of the Superior Chamber of the TEPJF.
According to the General Law of Electoral Institutions and Procedures (LEGIPE), the reprimands could also be a fine of up to 10,000 days of minimum wage or the interruption of the transmission of political-electoral propaganda for a specified time. In a serious case, deregistration as a political party may be considered.
“Article 9 of the LEGIPE provides that partisan officials or candidates can be punished with up to six years in prison in two particular cases that can be related to this case: one is pressure or induction of voters to vote. or not to do it for a certain candidate or party on the day of the election or three previous days, the second is to carry out or disseminate political propaganda during the day and the issue is that the dissemination of these messages occurred precisely on the day of the election day ” , details.
“The issue here is that a party candidate or official did not spread the messages, it was through a third party. What the courts have to analyze is whether the crime can be committed through a third party, in case it is proven that a candidate or official paid them directly to share the content ”, he adds.
The union of these elements was what caused an outbreak in social networks, led the brands to make decisions against these influencers and also the talent agencies, as they decided to cut the employment relationship with those involved.
The consequences
Seven of the 103 influencers who supported PVEM were part of the talent agency Epik Talent. Its founder and CEO Pablo Ahumada assures that, after seeing the content that the actors he represented shared on social networks, he made the decision to stop working with them.
“We are nonpartisan and we are in favor of free voting, but we do not share or support the positions of the people involved,” he says. “The fact that we work with them does not make us responsible for their actions or mistakes. What they did does not go with the values that we have as a company ”.
“We already had to take actions, for the moment leaving the labor relationship, it no longer exists with them, that is the reality,” adds Ahumada, who assures that he had contact with brands and companies with which he works to explain the decisions that had been made. within the agency and, thus, avoid the loss of clients.
“At this very close moment, no one wants to associate with someone who was involved, we spoke with them (clients) and communicated our position. The relationship did not end as companies, ”adds the founder of Epik Talent.
Claudia Benassini, a professor at LaSalle University and a specialist in digital marketing, assures that this strategy of using influencers is something that will be imitated in the 2024 elections “because it is pulling people, it has proven to be effective, although that does not mean that it is ethics, but the idea of staying in the mind of the voter becomes attractive for political parties ”.
However, the experts consulted agree that it is a practice that, beyond benefiting the parties, ends up harming the influencer marketing industry, since although it has had significant growth in recent years, there are still brands that do not trust in strategy, they see it as a taboo.
“These things affect, they become a bad image for our work. Brands are going to end up not hiring influencers and that hurts us all ”, says Gerardo Sordo.
In this sense, the industry proposal is clear: advertising through influencers and content creators must be regulated and transparent. In Mexico there must be a law that allows the effective management of these strategies.
