Donald Trump’s return to the White House might shock some – unless you’re tuned into the likes of Adin Ross, Andrew Schulz and, of course, Joe Rogan. These voices in the so-called “manosphere” – a loosely defined group of misogynistic, male influencers – are shaping the cultural zeitgeist more than ever.
Trump knew it too. In the final stretch of his campaign, he spent hours on their podcasts and streams. He reached millions of conservative and indifferent listeners, casting himself as one of them – a symbol of high-profile influence and a paragon of fame. For many younger voters who largely consume news through social feeds instead of mainstream outlets, it was their first real glimpse of Trump.
Through these appearances, Trump worked to soften and legitimatise himself, recasting extremist views through the humour lens that propels figures like Tony Hinchcliffe. Above all, he used them to drive voter turnout.
For marketers, this success has reignited a familiar worry. The rapid churn of digital culture amplifies both the benefits and risks of engaging with influencers, forcing marketers to confront long-avoided questions with fresh urgency – inside and outside the manosphere.
“As someone who’s deeply involved in the influencer marketing world, I’ve definitely noticed how Trump’s 2024 campaign and the rise of the ‘manosphere’ are shaking things up for brands,” said Ellen Flowers, influencer and editor of fashion blog The Perennial Style. “It’s a huge shift from traditional media to digital content creators, especially as influencers are playing an increasingly prominent role in shaping political conversations.”
Qualifying that influence is tricky. It’s one thing to link an influencer’s post to a surge in voter registration; its another to connect that to actual votes cast. Attribution, as ever, is a challenge for marketing. Still, the impact of the manosphere for Trump is evident – men under 30 favored him by 18 points, according to a CBS exit poll. For marketers, that’s a complex puzzle to piece together.
“I think over the past 48 hours, we’re seeing marketers adopt a heightened level of scrutiny toward influencer partnerships, a trend that’s solidified with Trump’s recent re-election win and the growing influence of politically charged personalities, said Saleha Malik, co-founder of boutique marketing agency S-Squared.
Some questions are already clear. Trump’s re-election has undeniably elevated the manosphere as a formidable influencer network, yet it leaves marketers divided on whether the appeal of this demographic is worth the reputational risks that come with association.
In another key area, though, the implications of this shift aren’t anything but clear. Trump’s victory ratified the fact that influencers are setting cultural agendas in ways that once only traditional media could. Marketers are left grappling with their role in this, especially since it’s their money that ultimately fuels this phenomenon.
“It’s too soon to say the impact it has post election, but in today’s fast-paced digital world, the way we consume news has undergone a seismic shift,” said Karan Dang , CEO of agency DANG, which focuses on next-gen audiences. “Gone are the days of waiting for the morning paper or tuning into the evening news – instead, younger generations are turning to digital creators as their primary source of information.”
It’s a pressing and paradoxical dilemma for marketers: harness the reach of influencers and creators while acknowledging that their investment propagates voices that can sway public opinion in unexpected ways. But let’s be honest – chances are marketers will keep taking that gamble. Capitalism thrives on risk and reward.
Moving forward, though, they tread more cautiously before opening their wallets.
“There’s very little protections for brands right now in contractual agreements that support a brand’s ability to cancel agreements if an influencer becomes the product of cancel culture for being political,” said Nathan Poekert, CMO at brand agency General Idea. “I always urge brands who are setting to work with macro influencers to include force majeure’s that allow them to cancel contracts if the influencer becomes embattled in controversy.”
Put another way: Marketers aren’t going to adopt the Trump campaign creator strategy – that was a targeted campaign dedicated to working with creators who have won over young men – but they will work to understand the machinations of it.
“The team that was creator-first won,” said James Nord, founder of influencer marketing shop Fohr. “That has to be a big wake up call to CMOs who don’t believe this is absolutely the future.”
The elevation of creators throughout the 2024 presidential election is a reflection of on-going movement from the traditional marketing and media landscape. The presidential election in some ways is the biggest ad campaign there is, with candidates spending more than $10 billion on ads for the 2024 cycle, and the more traditionally run campaign ultimately didn’t move the needle enough to win over voters.
“Ad blindness is real and the ‘attention economy’ is real,” said Brendan Gahan, founder of Creator Authority, noting that adopting traditional media placements around creator content that was popular with the election isn’t necessarily the answer for marketers but to foster deeper relationships with creators. “We’re in a deficit of time but people will sit there and listen to a three hour podcast.”
The on-going erosion of trust in major institutions – legacy brands and media alike – has led some consumers to further invest in creators that they do trust – whether or not that trust has been truly earned.
“In a world where their sound bites travel faster than fact, content creators have become the new arbiters of what is fact,” said Matt Wurst, CMO at vertical video platform Genuin. “It’s reflective of this seismic shift in public trust where creators and influencers are now seen as more authentic and relatable than traditional journalists and probably brands as well.”
That is something marketers may have been aware of prior to the election but will have to grapple with more seriously now.
“When consumers lose trust in institutions, be it legacy media or brands, the ability to persuade people, even if you can get your message in front of them, falls apart,” said Nord. “That is why brands have to have a creator-first strategy.”
Doing so will require marketers to define who their consumer is, figure out the creators they are spending time with and find ways to show up there by working with creators so that their brands can’t be ignored. The approach can’t simply be one of moving media dollars to the creators that matter but truly partnering with creators.
“The shift has mostly been looking at it through the lens of a budget allocation,” said Gahan. “It’s just another channel. We’re just shifting our budget. That’s the way 90% of marketers look at it. You will have a handful [who understand].”
The expectation is that marketers’ understanding of seeing creators beyond a media buy and truly understanding the potential that working deeply with creators provides for their brands will only grow in the coming months.
More in Marketing
The Trade Desk finally confirms it: Meet Ventura, the OS to cement its grip on CTV
The Trade Desk is indeed building a CTV operating system. So much for shutting down those rumors. Weeks ago, CEO Jeff Green insisted they were off-base.
Bluesky uncovered: separating myth from reality in its post-election surge
Social media minnow Bluesky has emerged as a surprise winner in the wake of this month’s presidential race.
Incoming Trump administration puts potential breakup of Google’s Chrome in new light
Some in the ad tech ecosystem believe only a fine of hundreds of billions of dollars will prove an effective deterrent.