The Mercury News

Lights are going out for crypto's laser-eyed grifters

- By Lionel Laurent Lionel Laurent is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering digital currencies, the European Union and France. Previously, he was a reporter for Reuters and Forbes.

There aren't many silver linings to be found in the cryptocurr­ency crash. People have lost money, often those who could least afford it. But one welcome casualty is the army of laser-eyed social media “influencer­s,” toxic promoters in what must surely rank as the one of the most egregious product-placement manias in financial history. What comes next should be a healthier focus on consumer protection in an age of digital investing.

The simple identifier of a pair of laser eyes — a badge of optimism that Bitcoin was headed for $100,000 and beyond — at its peak adorned the avatars of congresswo­men, billionair­es, sports stars and, of course, hordes of rank-and-file crypto enthusiast­s.

The lasers aren't shining so brightly after the latest rout in cryptoland, with some going completely dark, presumably in an effort at reputation­al damage control. The Winklevoss twins are now busy promoting their next act as musicians in a covers band called Mars Junction; Elon Musk is insisting he never told anyone to buy. And celebritie­s who once flaunted their nonfungibl­e tokens have now taken them down.

The real changes will come lower down the speculativ­e food chain, as the fuel runs out for viral economic narratives promoting crypto trading among young and impression­able consumers eager to get rich quicker than the rest of society.

The business model of influencer­s is to take real dollars in exchange for promoting virtual cash. At one point, YouTubers were being offered $30,000 to promote crypto-linked investment­s. But those dollars are drying up as trading on exchanges diminishes and startup funding disappears. Even Coinbase Global Inc., with a market capitaliza­tion of more than $12 billion, has slashed affiliate marketing fees, according to Business Insider. Influencer­s who just months ago were making $40 for each new sign-up to the platform are now being offered $2 to $3.

Celebritie­s such as Matt Damon and Larry David deserve the mudslingin­g for promoting ads, but at least their affiliatio­ns were clear. Not all social media personalit­ies are scammers. But those with less transparen­t ties to the products they were promoting — such as YouTuber Logan Paul, a cheerleade­r to his 23 million followers for collapsed token Dink Doink, a project that he told the New York Times in May went “absurdly wrong” — are clearly eroding the trust of followers in general.

And as the obvious ignorance of some crypto shills filters through to their fans — who will surely tire of the constant claims that crypto is an “inflation hedge” when it's anything but — more regulatory interventi­on as well as voluntary crackdowns by TikTok and other social media platforms are likely not far behind. Some reality TV stars' accounts have been shuttered, with Snapchat suspending Jazz and Laurent Correia last year.

This isn't about censorship, but transparen­cy. Jackson Palmer, Dogecoin's co-creator, has an umbrella term to describe our world: Griftonomi­cs. Applying it to crypto, he says, reveals a network of “bought influencer­s.” One study by the Dutch financial markets regulator of 150 influencer­s covering more than 1 million followers found that only a tiny fraction — around 1% — weren't making money from affiliated projects. many of which weren't disclosed.

The authoritie­s obviously have a role to play in cleaning up the worst excesses. Advertisin­g overseers in the U.K. and France have done a decent job in halting misleading ad campaigns. Kim Kardashian and Floyd Mayweather were both sued in January, accused of hyping a digital currency called EthereumMa­x to investors. Mayweather had already been fined by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in 2018 for touting coins without disclosing a financial interest, while last year Kardashian was admonished by the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority for using her fan base to promote “a speculativ­e digital token created a month before by unknown developers.”

But there's an urgent need for more financial and digital literacy, too. Young people are saddled with debts at an increasing­ly early age and feel the pressure acutely. There's also a feeling that wealth is accumulate­d through being lucky — born in the right generation or to the right family, or by backing the right token — rather than due to merit. That helps explain why buynow-pay-later loans have flourished among those who struggle to repay them, and why a high percentage of people follow and listen to influencer­s.

There's a role here for parents and educators, and maybe even specific apps with guardrails to allow for experiment­al spending with small amounts of cash. And it should also be possible for regulators to fight fire with fire: misleading economic narratives about inflation hedges could be countered by qualified influencer­s, as with other forms of misinforma­tion.

But for now, people with laser eyes on their profile photos have unwittingl­y slapped an obvious health warning on their content. If you see those two red dots, steer clear.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States