Create to influence and leave a long-lasting impact but not to defame. Till last year, content creation was all about influencing the audience with positive content. Recently, an increasing number of creators are using Defluence as a tool to defame and damage brands. Recently, influencer Sarthak Sachdeva publicly called out Gauri Khan’s restaurant Torii for serving “fake paneer.” Later, the creator was criticized by Chef Vikas Khanna and others in the community for spreading “terrible information.” Eventually, the creator had to remove that particular reel from his social media feed. A series of similar cases have cropped up in past as well.
By calling out reputed brands on social media – the creators are clearly damaging brand reputation. Perhaps, the influencers are not yet clear as to what Defluence really means!
Here steps in Indian Influencer Governing Council’s Code of Standards for Influencers which is a guiding framework to create awareness and give clarity to the influencer tribe encouraging them to create content that’s authentic, transparent, honest and responsible. In the Code of Standards for Influencers, Section 6 focuses on Defluence with some important aspects to take into consideration.
IIGC’s Defluence code 6.2: Some key points to consider
- Honesty & Accuracy
- Constructive Criticism
- Avoiding Defamation & Personal Attacks
- Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
- No Malicious Intent
Social media creators are expected to create organic content with honest opinion and alertness about a product without going to the extent of damaging the brand’s reputation. It has to be backed by thorough research and facts. A creator’s aim should be to educate and create awareness for their audience.
“If a creator is defluencing, it should be backed with a lot of lab tests, research and reports. One must not defame brands just for virality. Defluence is a strong word. One has to be very careful backed with solid facts. It takes a long time to build a brand and very little time to damage it. It’s very important for creators to bring awareness, again supported by fact checks. There is positive defluence too. Like how sugar was called out for its negative health effects. So creators should focus on that rather than random name calling. If not done correctly, defluence can turn into a worse case of defamation. Here, IIGC can be a good platform to address this serious problem,” says content creator Prerna Sinha, founder of Maa of all Blogs.
Defluence is clearly misunderstood when influencers publicly criticize or speak negatively about a brand, product, or service. It turns out worse when it creates significant consequences on consumer trust, brand reputation, and the influencer marketing ecosystem. While influencers have the right to express honest opinions, their criticism should be responsible, factual, and free from misinformation or personal bias.
For Creators – Here are some steps to avoid
- Defluencing a brand product should be based on evidence, fact and logic.
- Do not spread misinformation or conspiracy theories without proper fact checking and tests.
- If you are not a certified expert, do not claim to be one.
- Do not manipulate the audience’s emotions or opinions through biased or inappropriate content.
- Do not exploit followers’ vulnerabilities for financial gain.
Consequences of wrong Defluence
Unfairly criticizing brands and people just for fame sensationalism can lead to severe consequences. Defluencing is not an easy ball game. Here are some risks involved…
- Your followers will soon lose trust in you and the content you create.
- Your account can come under scanner by potential authorities.
- Difficulty to get brand collaborations as brands will lose trust.
Gaurav Soni, Head of Media for Perfetti says, “The worrying conflation of defluence with defamation—where creators, driven by engagement metrics, have abandoned fact-based critique in favor of sensationalism. This trend not only undermines the credibility of genuine voices but also erodes the foundational trust between brands and their audiences. This distortion of intent is especially problematic when creators position unverified claims or personal grievances as moral exposés. In doing so, they risk not only the reputations of brands often without sufficient context or proof but also dilute the impact of genuine whistleblowing. For brands, this creates a fragile environment where reputational risk doesn’t necessarily stem from wrongdoing, but from the perception of wrongdoing amplified by influential voices. And for the creator economy at large, this misappropriation of defluence threatens long-term credibility.”
Defaming brands or individuals can do more harm than good. It can have severe negative effects on a creator’s profile and not only the brand. Instead of misusing influence, creators should focus on producing authentic content that wins audience’s trust.
The Code of Standards for Influencers is publicly available.
Download your copy now.