Band 8 model answer

In recent years, social media influencers have displaced traditional advertisers as the primary marketing force shaping the purchasing decisions of younger consumers. I consider this a predominantly negative trend, despite the occasional genuine benefits it offers.

The central problem is one of transparency. Traditional advertising, however manipulative it may have been, was universally understood to be commercial in nature. Influencer content, by contrast, frequently blurs the boundary between personal recommendation and paid promotion. When a popular figure promotes a product to millions of followers in the guise of an authentic lifestyle choice, the commercial relationship is often inadequately disclosed. Young audiences in particular may lack the media literacy to recognise that the enthusiasm being expressed is financially incentivised.

This opacity creates fertile ground for harm. The wellness and beauty industries have exploited influencer culture to promote products of questionable efficacy, and in some cases outright dangerous supplements, to audiences who trust the presenter as they would a friend. The consequences can range from wasted money to genuine health risks.

There is a counterargument that influencers with genuine expertise in niche areas, such as independent book reviewers or technology specialists, provide more nuanced and credible analysis than conventional advertising ever did. This is true in certain cases. However, such instances represent a small fraction of the broader influencer economy, which is dominated by fashion, lifestyle, and beauty content where expertise is rarely a prerequisite.

Ultimately, the trend reflects and accelerates an erosion of the boundary between content and commerce. Stronger regulatory requirements for disclosure and greater investment in media literacy education are necessary to mitigate the harm this development poses, particularly for adolescent audiences.