Photography: Getty Images, Instar, Instagram/@proactiv, Instagram/kylieskin.18O
ELLEBeautyELLE.COM/UK November 2O19JACLYN HILL
When the YouTuber launched her
brand this year, consumers complained
of ‘sweating’ lipstick and faulty
packaging. Jaclyn apologised, shut
down the site and gave refunds.PROACTIV
The cult brand from the 2OOOs
tried to make a comeback but was
blighted by past customers
claiming the main ingredient used
was intended to bleach.K YLIE SKIN BY KYLIE JENNER
The ‘self-made’ beauty billionaire
launched her skincare line this year,
but the baying crowds said the walnut
exfoliator caused micro-tears to skin.
The brand did not address the claims.SEPHORA
The beauty version of Willy Wonka’s
Chocolate Factory was in trouble over
claims of employees racially profiling
their customers. Stores nationwide were
closed for a ‘diversity training day’.The BRANDS THAT CALL-OUT CULTURE CANCEL L ED
to the post’s 232 comments with 24 exasperated replies. ‘Actually, it’s
not a silicone. It’s not sneaky or cheeky. All anyone has to do is ask’ as
well as ‘I’m open to hearing and I think from reading this thread that
many are misunderstanding the philosophy’.
Then it went one step further: the company also encouraged
commenters to join its weekly live Q&A sessions. ‘Brands are
now expected to act on this [feedback]
in almost real time because consumers
want to see immediate action and results,’
Estée Laundry noted. Case in point:
an incendiary outcry against Fenty
Beauty’s announcement of an upcoming
highlighter with the shade name
‘Geisha Chic’ caused the brand to issue
an apology and cancel the launch before
the product had even hit shelves.
It’s also remarkable that a comment
typed into the iPhone of a woman on her
couch in the middle of the US can ruffle
feathers in a New York City boardroom
thousands of miles away. But what social
media has done is allowed everyone to
have a vocal seat at the table. And, if that sounds like platitude, it’s not.
The world’s biggest beauty companies, such as L’Oréal and Estée
Lauder, use some of these unfiltered complaints to guide their marketing
and product design.here were nearly three million points of contact from
consumers across our brands and across all channels
in 2O18,’ says Gretchen Saegh-Fleming, chief marketing
officer of L’Oréal USA. ‘A decade ago, communication
was private, one-to-one and primarily limited to the
phone. [Today we connect] with customers on up to
1O different channels at any given time. And that’s not only on Facebook,
Instagram and Twitter — our consumers are getting in touch with us
on YouTube and Reddit, and via webchat.’
For Lahnie Strange, senior vice president of makeup marketing
and product development at Estée Lauder: ‘We look at it as a gift,’
she says. ‘Being able to be tuned in every day not only helps me in
tweaking existing products, but ser ves as inspiration for where I can
take the business in the future.’ In some cases, it informs something
as simple as changing the texture of a lip gloss; in other instances,it spurs entirely new ways of developing products from the start, as
with L’Oréal-owned Lancôme and its foundation-mixing machine.
‘We created a customised foundation technology called Lancôme
Le Teint Particulier that can detect and match individual skin tones
in minutes,’ Saegh- Fleming says. ‘This was brought about in part
by consumer frustration at not being able to locate their exact shade.’
In the case of Glossier, which declined
to comment for this story, the company
responded publicly within weeks to
say that biodegradable glitter was in
development and it will phase out some
of the excessive packaging. In the months
since, it has also introduced a recycling
programme for its famous pink plastic
bubble pouches, and an opt-out option
for whether to receive one at all.
Call - out s’ tendenc y to be ef fecti ve in it s
criticism may be because beauty products
live at the crossroads of personal and
luxury. Our emotional attachment to, and
trust in, beauty products is strong, but if that
bond is broken, there are always substitutes
to replace our once-beloved buys. Which makes them a perfect target
for taking a stand against. It becomes an easy formula for expressing
your opinion. Think about it... When’s the last time you actually tweeted
a tech giant about its use of cheap labour to make your mobile phone?
While the Glossier kerfuffle ensued over its new Glossier Play
brand, I compulsively refreshed the Instagram comments to spy on
incoming bits of drama: ‘Hope this side brand flops — not Glossier,
not eco, not fun.’ ‘This is 2O19 and there is not a single reason other
than greed to not use biodegradable glitter.’
But then I looked down. With nails painted in five coats of
sparkling silver flecks, I was (literally) wagging a glitter-coated finger.
The glitter wasn’t biodegradable, and the revelation didn’t result
in the upending of my entire beauty cabinet. Admittedly, my
resistance to a brand’s objectionable practices seems to have its limits
somewhere around the borders of convenience.
‘Call-out culture is like a one-year-old learning to walk.
It’s a struggle,’ says Nakamura. ‘But, on the other hand, what’s the
alternative – never walking? This culture is what we have, right now.
It allows us to take our own moral temperature, to put a mirror to
ourselves and our society. And that’s a good thing.’“BRANDS ARE
EXPECTED to AC T
ON FEEDBACK
in REAL TIME
FOR IMMEDIATE
RESULTS “