Public places are banning influencers

The Future. Despite the creator economy thriving, more cafes, businesses, and even towns are deciding the influencer exposure isn’t worth the headache. That’s potentially bad news for micro-influencers who rely on a steady flow of content to stay in the conversation… but it could be uniquely beneficial for brands and businesses looking to create “offline” experiences that every influencer wishes they could document.

Anti-influencing
Influencers may no longer be trending, according to Mashable.

• Dae, a design shop and cafe in Brooklyn, instituted a no photos-and-videos policy (other than a quick snap) because influencers have “gotten a bit out of control for us.”
• Pomfret, a town in Vermont, closed access to tourists of its most-photographed public spaces because influencers had caused the area too much damage.
• Andorra, a micronation in Europe, is even instituting new laws to curb the migration of YouTubers.
• And in recent years, a hotel in Ireland and a cafe in Taiwan also put up that “No Influencers” sign.

Why would businesses and local governments be against the free publicity provided by influencers? There are several reasons.

• They can’t handle the popularity — it draws too many people for businesses without enough resources or space.
• The wave of customers that influencers bring in (and just want to get a photo) can scare off long-term customers — a more sustainable business model.
• Influencers often want to exchange content for goods or services, which some businesses have found isn’t a fair trade most of the time.

None of this means influencing is going away… but the industry may be contracting as brands try to focus on allocating resources to influencers who can truly move the needle. Influencer marketing agency Linqia recently found brands are increasingly preferring to partner with “macro-influencers” if they want to make a splash on socials.