OpinionDiscussion

3 Rules that cost me ₹20 CRORES!!

Food Pharmer

A food influencer explains three ethical rules he follows despite potential financial losses: refusing food brand deals to maintain impartiality, rejecting payments to criticize competitors, and always disclosing sponsored content with hashtags. These principles have reportedly cost him ₹20 crores in potential earnings.

Summary

The speaker, a food influencer, discusses three core ethical rules that govern his content creation and brand partnerships, contrasting his approach with typical influencer practices in their respective niches. He observes that tech influencers primarily do tech brand deals (99%) and beauty influencers primarily do beauty brand deals (99%), yet he deliberately breaks this pattern by refusing to partner with food brands despite being known as a food influencer. His first rule is a complete ban on food brand deals, which he maintains to preserve his credibility and ability to offer impartial reviews and commentary. His second rule addresses a common but unethical practice: he refuses to accept money from brands to create negative content about competitors, even if those competitors don't pay for promotion. He explicitly states he will not create comparative videos that artificially elevate one product while diminishing another in exchange for payment. His third rule mandates complete transparency in sponsored content through the use of hashtags marking advertisements (referencing #ads or similar disclosure tags). The speaker frames these rules as principles he will uphold despite their significant financial cost, quantifying the opportunity cost at ₹20 crores, suggesting these ethical boundaries represent substantial foregone income.

Key Insights

  • The speaker argues that 99% of tech influencers do tech brand deals and 99% of beauty influencers do beauty brand deals, establishing this as the industry norm that he deliberately deviates from
  • Despite being a food influencer, the speaker refuses all food brand deals as a deliberate strategy to maintain editorial impartiality and credibility
  • The speaker claims he receives offers from brands to create negative comparative content against competitors without promoting the paying brand, which he categorically rejects
  • The speaker estimates his ethical rules against food deals, paid criticism, and non-disclosure have collectively cost him ₹20 crores in potential revenue
  • The speaker commits to mandatory disclosure of all brand deals through advertising hashtags as a non-negotiable transparency practice

Topics

Influencer ethics and integrityBrand partnership practicesDisclosure and transparency requirementsFinancial costs of maintaining ethical standardsImpartiality in content creation

Transcript

[0:00] Can you imagine a tech influencer not doing tech deals and a beauty and fashion influencer not doing beauty and fashion deals? Brother, whoever is a beauty influencer, 99% of his brand deals with beauty. 99% of the brand deals of a tech influencer are tech. I am a food influencer in the public eye and I do not deal with food brands. I have some rules. One is No Food Brand Deals. I will try my best to remain impartial. Second is [0:31] I will not take money from anyone to criticize someone. Many people offer. Okay, you do n't promote me but take money from me and make a video against some competitor. Yes, compare two products.…

Full transcript available for MurmurCast members

Sign Up to Access

More from Food Pharmer

Get AI summaries like this delivered to your inbox daily

Get AI summaries delivered to your inbox

MurmurCast summarizes your YouTube channels, podcasts, and newsletters into one daily email digest.