Nine Years Later: Is the smash-and-grab approach still turning influencer marketing into a sh*t show?

Alright. Back in early 2017, I wrote a (quite strongly worded) opinion piece for PRWeek in which I argued that the concept of a smash-and-grab approach was turning the influencer marketing industry into a (bit of a) shit show.

If you either A) were not in the space back then, or B) like to reminisce, allow me to paint you a quick picture of what things were like back then.

• Reach was the name of the game.
• The micro vs macro debate was in full swing.
• Agencies were running the show.

My main concern back then was that the extent of an influencer relationship was built on the premise of smash-and-grab: use the creator to reach their audience, hit them with one (or two if you felt really confident) posts, and get out. Reach = Influence.

Terms like community and brand advocacy were incredibly far removed from influencer marketing, and it always baffled me that there was so much emphasis on the paid layer only.

My (perhaps somewhat naive) opinion was that reach did not necessarily equate real influence, and that the starting point of any good influencer marketing strategy should sit with those that already love your brand.

And to be clear, the argument was not anti-creator and it was not anti-paid. It was there to create a path for influencer marketing to become something more meaningful.

Fast forward to 2026

Execution has improved. Massively. Budgets have skyrocketed. The model has effectively become the default way to do influencer marketing.

But clearly this way of working with content creators is working, otherwise it simply would not exist. And that is a valid point: content at scale is efficient, it is driving sales, so why even write this piece?

One of the reasons I am writing this is because I am noticing an uptick around conversations on LinkedIn about how influencer partnerships should be more meaningful. More longer-term partnerships, etc. It is resonating with people, and I think this gives us a meaningful springboard to advocate for something I have always wanted to see.

Influencer advertising vs influencer marketing

This is where the industry still gets stuck. The practice has evolved in the last decade, but our terminology has not.

Marketing is a business practice that involves identifying, predicting, and meeting customer needs. Advertising is a business practice where a company pays to place its messaging or branding in a particular location.

There is nothing inherently wrong with influencer advertising — but at best it is an operational tactic, not a fully fledged strategic approach. There is a huge opportunity for it to develop into true influencer marketing, and in doing so, avoid a race to the bottom where content creators stop being human beings and start becoming paid inventory.

Brand advocacy is not talked about enough

My first few years in the industry were very much about grassroots influence. Not the glitz and the glam, but supporting brands to build infrastructure that enables offline and online influence to drive success.

Not just paying creators to promote, but developing tactics to ensure that influence spreads without payment, without a brief.

Influencer marketing should be less about manufacturing trust, and more about removing friction from recommendation.

The infrastructure opportunity

There is one word that did not exist within the context of influencer marketing back in 2017, and that is infrastructure.

The smash-and-grab model has been perpetuated and strengthened across all layers: talent agencies, influencer agencies, and tech. The infrastructure created over the past decade fits the needs of influencer advertising perfectly.

• Identification. Vetting. Contracting.
• Briefing. Content. Reporting.
• Rinse, repeat, scale.

Real influencer marketing requires infrastructure that supports: advocacy identification, community management, reporting beyond a one-off campaign, cross-functional ownership (marketing, service, comms), and online and offline feedback loops.

Without this, brands default to what they can operationalise: paid content. Not because it is better, but because it is easier.

2035?

Smash-and-grab influencer marketing — sorry, I mean influencer advertising — is, a whole nine years later, still the go-to approach for the majority of the industry. It makes a lot of people a lot of money, and processes have efficiently developed around it.

You will often read about how quick the influencer marketing industry moves, but 90% of the articles I wrote a decade ago still hold up now, and that is saying something.

But the momentum is changing, the conversation is evolving, and for the first time in years I feel as if influencer marketing is actually shifting into something more meaningful. Let us pick this up in nine years time.