Researchers from University of Alabama and Vanderbilt University published a new Journal of Marketing study that examines the negative consequences that celebrities and influences incur when they disable social media comments.

The study, forthcoming in the Journal of Marketing, is titled “No Comments (From You): Understanding the Interpersonal and Professional Consequences of Disabling Social Media Comments” and is authored by Michelle Daniels and Freeman Wu.

Celebrities and influencers like Addison Rae, Hailey Bieber, Justin Timberlake, and even Oprah have, on various occasions, disabled access to their social media comments in response to negative sentiment. Is this misguided?

The answer is yes, according to new research published in the Journal of Marketing. The study finds that influencers who disable social media comments are less persuasive and less likable than those who do not, even when the displayed comments are mostly negative in their content.

Celebrities and influencers are more than just public figures in today’s digital age. They often serve as a bridge connecting brands and consumers by integrating their personal narratives into sponsored brand content. Despite their popularity, influencers receive plenty of criticism and they often disable comments on social media as a first line of defense against negative feedback. However, this behavior can negatively impact how consumers judge influencers and respond to their promotional content.

Online influencers have the ability to interact with their followers in a relatively intimate and informal manner, which makes them seem sincere and approachable. Such positive assessments are often a product of how influencers engage with their viewers or followers, including directly addressing them in their posts and treating them more as friends than as consumers. While these behaviors can dramatically increase consumer engagement, this level of approachability can also come at a cost.

As consumers become accustomed to influencers’ accessibility, they may feel emboldened to share feedback that is critical. The constant stream of followers’ feedback can be overwhelming and even detrimental to influencers’ mental health. As a result, many influencers have chosen to turn off their comment sections at various points, likely to avoid unwanted feedback. This research reveals the negative downstream consequences of this seemingly well-intentioned behavior.

The Cost of Disengagement

As Daniels explains, “we discover that when influencers disable comments, they are perceived as less receptive to consumer feedback, or what we term ‘consumer voice.’ Consequently, they are judged as less sincere and ultimately incur both interpersonal and professional consequences. In other words, disabling comments can undermine a key influencer asset, their perceived receptiveness to consumer voice and their ability to connect and engage with their followers.”

In fact, turning off comments is more costly for an influencer’s reputation than leaving them on, even when the displayed comments are mostly negative in nature, like those you might find flooding an apology post. This effect occurs because influencers who leave their comments enabled appear to be interested in hearing from the public and learning from their actions while those who turn them off signal their dismissiveness of others’ opinions.

Under certain situations, consumers understand an influencer’s decision to disable comments. If, for example, an influencer is perceived as taking reasonable measures to protect themselves during times of emotional turmoil and distress (e.g., grief and mental health struggles), the backlash against disabling comments is weakened. “However, it is critical to note that it is consumers, rather than the influencers, who decide what are considered reasonable forms of self-protection,” says Wu. So, while consumers might empathize with an influencer’s decision to disable comments if their beloved pet had recently died, they may be less empathetic to influencers who disable comments to avoid negative feedback after apologizing for a transgression.

Lessons for Influencers and Brands

These findings highlight the importance of understanding the delicate balance between establishing personal boundaries and managing audience expectations. While it is necessary for influencers to protect their mental health, how they decide to communicate this desire and manage their social media interactions play a significant role in shaping relationships with their viewership.

Global spending on influencer marketing campaigns reached $34.1 billion in 2023 and is projected to surpass $47.8 billion by the end of 2027. Therefore, seemingly innocuous online activities could have important professional ramifications for influencers’ brand partnerships. The decision to disable social media comments can reduce influencer persuasiveness, which emphasizes the importance of ensuring communication between brands and influencers to optimize their strategic partnerships. The study encourages thoughtful consideration of how best to manage one’s online interactions and highlights the need to clearly communicate a legitimate reason for disabling comments to avoid sending the wrong signals to viewers.

For 37-year-old Caviteña Annalyn Fernan, selling suman (rice cake) and other native delicacies online is her lifeline and way forward. The beneficiary of an overseas Filipino worker in Saudi Arabia who passed away last year, Fernan now has the sole responsibility of earning to support the needs of her family.

During the pandemic, Fernan’s senior mother thought of starting their suman business, which continues to do well even today. To boost their sales, Fernan uses her phone and the internet to market their products on social media and receive more orders online.

 “We get orders from our community, and we even receive orders from other OFWs overseas who see my posts online,” she shared. “That’s why having a reliable internet connection is important to me.”

 A mother of two, Fernan also devotes her time to growing her loading and bills payment business, which was part of the OFW Family Livelihood Program jointly awarded by the Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) and PLDT Global Corporation (PLDT Global) earlier this year. The livelihood program also awarded Fernan a Smart Ka-Partner retailer package, including a smartphone and marketing materials and signages to help her increase her sales.

“The money I earn from the business helps us in our daily needs, that’s why I’m grateful,” she said. “To PLDT Global, I am thankful that they are partners with the DMW and they are able to help make our lives easier.”

Fernan was also visited by the DMW and PLDT Global, led by DMW Assistant Secretary for Reintegration Venecio V. Legaspi (third from the right) and PLDT Global Vice President for Strategic Partnerships Jojo Quiamas (third from the left), deeply moving the entrepreneur.

 She also expressed her thanks to the DMW. “They stayed with us until the very end. In fact, they are still here to assist, support, and visit us. I hope they will be able to help more OFW families like us,” Fernan shared emotionally.

 “This is a testament to our commitment to helping not only OFWs, but their families as well by supporting and empowering them through various programs with our partners like PLDT Global,” said DMW Secretary Hans Cacdac.  

 Aside from the livelihood program, PLDT Global also held digital literacy programs for OFWs. Just last year, with the help of the PLDT-Smart Foundation and other partners in the organization, PLDT Global provided upskilling grants, gadgets, and training for cacao farming to reintegrated OFWs. They also gave LearnSmart kits to the children of an OFW in Qatar.

 “We hope that through the unified efforts of PLDT Global and the DMW we can continue to uplift the lives of Filipinos and help them realize their fullest potential,” said Albert V. Villa-Real, President and CEO at PLDT Global.

PLDT Global continues to bridge the digital gap by bringing digital services to Filipinos around the world through products and services, particularly through TINBO — the one-stop marketplace that enables Filipinos living overseas to buy load, pay bills, send food vouchers, e-gifts, healthcare PINs from mWell, and even gaming PINs for their families in the Philippines. Through TINBO, OFWs can also acquire a Smart virtual number (SVN), enabling them to receive important OTPs from their e-wallets and e-banks in the Philippines. TINBO also provides overseas Filipinos access to a convenient and secured online bills payment platform for their Philippine utilities, and other digital services while outside the Philippines.

 PLDT Global’s partnership with the DMW to help ensure the well-being of OFWs and their families is a fundamental part of the much broader PLDT commitment to serve and lift the quality of life of Filipinos everywhere.

Charities seeking opportunities for growth have experienced a recent surge in online giving, growing by 42 percent since 2019, according to the most recent Charitable Giving Report from the Blackbaud Institute.

Mobile giving, in particular, has gained popularity, with 28 percent of all online contributions coming from smartphones in 2021 — a percentage that has more than tripled since 2014.

Not all online giving is equal, however. New research from the University of Notre Dame reveals a “mobile giving gap,” which demonstrates that consumers are less likely to donate to charities when using smartphones than when using PCs.

“The mobile giving gap: The negative impact of smartphones on donation behavior,” recently published online by the Journal of Consumer Psychology, was authored by Kristen Ferguson, assistant professor of marketing at Notre Dame’s Mendoza College of Business, along with Stefan Hock and Kelly Herd from the University of Connecticut.

Charities have long recognized the benefits of appealing to consumers in a variety of ways, including door-to-door, direct mailers, personal phone calls and, more recently, through virtual reality. Because of the major differences in these methods, charities often adapt their appeals to align with the solicitation style.

The study shows the need to further fine-tune their strategies.

“Although charities are willing to adapt their appeals to these different channels, they have not yet recognized the importance of adapting their online appeals across device types,” Ferguson said.

Organizations typically use identical appeals across device types, according to a review of the donation pages of the Forbes Top 100 Charities.

Previous research identified a “mobile mindset,” recognizing that consumers process information and behave differently on their smartphones than when on their laptops or desktop computers.

This study looks more closely at this phenomenon, in part through a collaboration with German charity Aktion Deutschland Hilft, an alliance of German humanitarian aid agencies.

“Our research describes critical attributes of a mobile mindset, in which consumers are more self-focused and less ‘other-focused’ on their smartphones than on their PCs,” Ferguson said. “This is because they constantly have their smartphones with them and view the devices as a part of the self, so are more likely to think about themselves rather than others when using them.”

Donating requires people to focus on and empathize with others, but that can be sabotaged by smartphones inducing self-focus.

“Charities would be best served by working to induce other-focus for smartphone users,” Ferguson said. “Specifically, those appeals would highlight the fact that the main beneficiary of support is another individual or group.”

An ad highlighting others may specify that the donor can “help those less fortunate,” “help make the community a better place for everyone” or “imagine how your donation will enhance the lives of those affected by cancer.”

“When donation appeals explicitly highlight the needs of others, people using smartphones will become less focused on their own and more conscious of others’ needs, which will dissipate the mobile giving gap,” Ferguson said.

Companies, including many nonprofits, spend more than $224 billion annually on Google Ads, according to Statista. In fact, highlighting the value of this platform for nonprofits, Google Ads offers eligible nonprofits $120,000 of free Google ads per year. Since 2003, the Google Ads Grants program has provided $10 billion in free advertising to more than 115,000 nonprofits across 51 countries, according to Nonprofits Source.

Charities can better leverage this opportunity by developing ads that directly target consumers on either smartphones or PCs.

Although mobile giving may appear to be on the rise, the uptick is likely driven by increases in overall smartphone ownership, the researchers said. This study suggests charities are leaving money on the table by using a one-size-fits-all strategy for all forms of online giving.

“Charities see value in measuring mobile giving as a separate category of online giving, but they still don’t see the importance of adapting their donation appeals across device types,” Ferguson said. “Our work shows why and how to change that.”