De-Influencing: Sustainable Baddie’s Ethos Gets A New Name

There’s a new buzzword floating around TikTok that’s sparking a shift in influencer culture, consumerism, and the ability for one to call themselves a sustainable baddie: “de-influencing.” Our very own Chief Sustainable Baddie, CEO Jazmine Rogers, recently had a moment on TikTok where people took notice of the now viral de-influencing audio. The TikTok shows her relaxing with her cat on the couch while the audio tells the viewer “I am here to de-influence you. Do not get the UGG Minis, do not get the Dyson Air Wrap, do not get the Charlotte Tilbury wand, do not get the Stanley Cup, do not get Colleen Hoover books, do not get the AirPods Pro Max. If you do any of those things… a bomb is gonna explode.”

The comments section has a range of different responses. Some people, ironically, ask Jazmine for brand recs. Others are angry about something expensive in the background. And many are happy to hear that we no longer want to be seduced into buying unnecessary items. The video has garnered over 2 million views, which leads us to wonder: has everyone suddenly become a sustainable baddie? We can’t help but notice that the idea of “de-influencing” echoes our publication's ethos. Since our launch in April of 2022, Sustainable Baddie has been promoting de-influencing by way of mindful consumption, but is this “de-influencing” trend doing the same thing?

What is De-Influencing? 

“De-influencing” is a term that describes the emerging viral trend dedicated to challenging the impact that influencers can have on a person's opinions, beliefs, or purchasing decisions. Like Jazmine’s viral TikTok, this can be done by affirming the fact that we don’t need every hyped item on social media, by encouraging education about the ethicality of promoted products, or by exposing the hidden incentives behind influencer promotions. While the term had its roots in dispelling trends or offering product alternatives, ultimately, it seems that the goal of de-influencing is to empower individuals to make informed decisions and avoid being influenced. If this is the case, sign us up! As sustainable baddies, we like to take a deeper look into trends that appear to encourage susty practices. Is de-influencing just that—a trend? Or is this truly the age of the sustainable baddie?

The buzzword also arrives at a time when Gen-Z is experiencing their own version of a Watergate scandal… mascara-gate. Late last month, beauty influencer Mikayla Nogueira was accused of using false lashes while promoting L'Oréal's Telescopic Lift mascara. This revelation sparked controversy around whether or not the influencer was lying about the power of the mascara and how much we should actually trust the opinion of someone being paid to promote a product. We love to hear that people are choosing to think twice about the authenticity of paid promotions and whether or not a trendy item is actually worth their money. Not to mention, it’ll allow smaller, independent designers more visibility and opportunities to make their mark. But most importantly, it could slow consumption, which has sped up unsustainably following the TikTok trend cycle. 

Is De-Influencing Afraid of the S-Word?

In the summer of 2021, fashion analyst, writer, and TikToker Mandy Lee, known online as @OldLoserInBrooklyn, made a trend prediction hinting at the emergence of “de-influencing,”

“It’s no longer enough to be beautiful and give product recommendations. Consumers, viewers, and folks behind the screen value authenticity. With that comes having a point of view, personal style, [which is] not limited to the decade-long norm of weekly hauls, PR unboxings, wearing new things every day, [and] glamorizing overconsumption in general. The new wave of fashion influencing is through thoughtful critique, education, styling, and genuine creativity.” 

Lee goes on to express excitement about how this theorized renaissance could be a tool to encourage more mindful consumption. Lee’s optimistic take on “de-influencing” is one that we can surely get behind. We’d love to see people having more open conversations about unhealthy consumption habits and supporting authenticity beyond the trend factor of any person or thing. But is this really how de-influencing is manifesting in online spaces like TikTok? The search results for “de-influencing” on TikTok suggest otherwise. Funnily enough, much of the “de-influencing” tag consists of people trying to convince viewers to buy an alternative to a popular item, which is still influencing. It feels like de-influencing is missing the one word that should be at the center of its meaning: sustainability.

De-Influencing: The Prelude to a Creative Renaissance

Obviously, not everyone has become a susty baddie overnight. But there is evidence to suggest that the paradigm is shifting and that, possibly, the masses have become tired of allowing brand ambassadors and/or algorithms to be the arbiters of taste. The world of fashion, beauty, and art has been gatekept by brands who hold the power to dictate fashion trends and consumer behavior. Over the last fifteen years, we’ve seen the power in the fashion and beauty industries shift from major publications to influencers. The rise of the influencer came, in part, because consumers felt they could trust a real person in their bedroom over a celebrity spokesperson or a magazine with brand partnerships. As we wake up to the fact that promotions should inherently be questioned no matter where they come from, could this signal another power shift? Might it be one that’s democratizing? 

We’ve heard mainstream influencers like Emma Chamberlain say that influencer culture is dead; perhaps their judgment day has come. De-influencing could just be leading us into the creative renaissance we’ve been waiting for since daddy DaVinci painted Miss Lisa, or since Our Lord and Savior, Britney Spears released “Slave 4 U”. So, if we’re no longer being influenced to buy UGG Minis or Dyson Air Wraps, what are we doing? We’re making our love for fashion, beauty, and art less about consumption and more about being innovative and resourceful. That’s not to say you should suddenly feel pressured to define the styles and trends of the decade. Creative outlets like fashion and beauty do not need to be centered around following (or even setting) trends. It’s far more interesting to see what you can conceive out of what is already available to you than it is to buy something new each time you crave a change. 

Ultimately, this collective shift in thought could lead to more conscious consumption habits and steer the direction of fashion, beauty, and creativity away from materialism and back toward artistic expression. With the emergence of de-influencing, power is transferring back to the general public. Like Lee observed back in 2021, uniqueness and individuality could become our gauge for self-worth and social value. If we stop allowing influencers’ paid promotions to dictate what’s in and what’s out, we could see fashion unleashed from the limitations of capitalist, white-supremacist trend cycles, and morph into an art form that feeds our communities and our souls, as all art should. Only when individuals are freed from influence can they express themselves authentically, and influencing and trend cycles stifle that potential to an insidious degree. If we take de-influencing in this direction, it could revitalize the anti-consumption movement that sustainable fashion has always been about. 

Dump the Trend Cycle, Be a Sustainable Baddie

Sustainable Baddie is uniquely situated between the fashion and beauty industries and the grassroots sustainability space. As a publication focused around illuminating a better path forward, we are conscientious that this is a nuanced topic. We as a brand do promote products periodically. Still, we try to hinge the products we promote on our values, which are to shop at small, local, sustainable, and ethical businesses, and to buy products we want and need that will offer us longevity. Consumption-free options, such as DIYs, thrifting, and re-wearing, remain the primary focus of our content, as opposed to us framing these as “alternatives”. This ethos helps us stay aware of what we are buying and give our money to people and teams we believe in. 

We’ll conversely never tell you not to buy something you genuinely want or need. All we ask is that it be more than a transaction between your bank account and the manufacturer. We encourage you to shop small, sustainable, and secondhand, thus normalizing the circular economy. 

If de-influencing endures past its current “trending” status and influencer culture dissipates, the shift could be profound. The simple fact that “de-influencing” has fallen under the trend category hints at its impermanence. Let’s look to de-influencing as an opportunity to make lasting change, and not as a trend we partake in to save money for a while. Allow yourself the space to be imperfect, but commit to doing the work; that’s what we’re all about!

Whether or not people are saying it explicitly, it seems sustainability is having a moment in the sun right now. The idea of “de-influencing” is heavily tied to ideas of conscious consumption, respecting the earth, and making use of what we already have—ideas that many cultures, especially indigenous ones, have been practicing for centuries. When we respect the earth and tame our cravings for materiality, creativity and innovation blossom.

We truly haven’t known peace since Kate Sanders called Lizzie McGuire out for being an “outfit repeater”. Rewearing clothing is normal, and it’s a lot less stress-inducing than having to worry about whether someone has seen your outfit before. Wear it again. It was cute the first time, and it’ll still be cute the second, third, fourth, and fifth time you wear it. Ask yourself, “WWSBD (What Would a Sustainable Baddie Do)?” As much as we tell ourselves our individual choices don’t make a difference, the more we make the small changes we wish would materialize on a large scale, the closer we get to that reality. We hope that de-influencing is just the beginning of a shift that normalizes sustainability, creativity, and resourcefulness.  

What’s your opinion on “de-influencing”? Do you think the movement is here to stay?