ly if they state the facts and avoid sharing their personal opinion.  While some have said the change ‘banning’ influencers from spruiking goods for money, the guidelines only impact products that are already covered under the TGA’s purview.  According to founder of Korean beauty marketplace Style Story, Lauren Lee, it is an important step toward protecting consumers and influencers themselves from false or misleading advertising. “Not only are the majority of influencers not qualified to proffer opinions on TGA products, most can’t tell the difference between a regular cosmetic, a TGA-regulated product, and a product making therapeutic claims,” Lee told Inside Retail.  “While brands have the primary responsibility to make sure they are marketing their products in accordance with the law, influencers, who are accepting payment and free product in exchange for testimonials, shouldn’t be able to absolve themselves of responsibility simply by claiming they don’t understand or know their legal obligations.” Lee also noted that she hopes the change will encourage more influencers to scrutinise the brands they work with, as they can now be held liable should its marketing come under investigation. Psychologist and founder of digital wellbeing website Digital Nutrition, Jocelyn Brewer, agrees. “The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) regulates health professionals on a variety of levels, including around marketing practices so that consumers are not misled,” Brewer told Inside Retail.  “Influencers often have no training in these concepts, or duty of care to their audience, which I think needs attention, given the volume and amplification of their content and potential for misinformation.” Short-term pain for long-term gain While some influencers have embraced the changes with open arms, not all are so welcoming. Beauty influencer Emma Mugica told The Australian a majority of her income will be impacted by the TGA’s decision, which will also push businesses away from paying influencers to reach their more targeted audiences.  According to a report from data analytics platform HypeAuditor, some of the brands expected to be most impacted by the change are vitamin businesses Nature’s Way and Swisse, and sunscreen brand Ultra Violette, which each rely heavily on influencers for marketing. Nature’s Way engaged around 100 influencers in the last six months, stated the report, while Swisse worked with 76. Together, it’s estimated the businesses reached over 1.5 million people. Ultra Violette worked with about 327 Instagram influencers, who together reach about 2.6 million people, and largely have a following of between 1,000 and 5,000 people – so called ‘nano influencers’. HypeAuditor’s chief executive and co-founder Alexander Frolov said the updated ruling would likely cause some confusion and contention in the short term, but that he didn’t believe it would negatively impact influencers in the long term. “While brands and influencers [will] take time to assess what the ruling means for their collaborations, we don’t believe that it will stop brands from working with influencers in this area,” said Frolov. “Influencer marketing shows excellent return on investment in this particular category and with a few tweaks to how the content is worded, there shouldn’t be any major disruptions.”