Abstract
Company-influencer collaborations are widespread, yet little is known about the fallout when both parties transgress. Addressing this gap, this research examines company-influencer transgressions, instances where both parties jointly mislead consumers, and investigates how consumers respond to each party (i.e., the company and the influencer). Using an empirics-first approach that combines longitudinal real-world data, experiments, surveys, and text analysis involving consumers and journalists, the authors show that influencers face greater backlash than companies. This asymmetry is not explained by influencers’ prominence or financial resources but by reduced media legitimacy, the extent to which influencers appear legitimate in media portrayals. Journalists tend to focus more on influencers, criticizing them more
harshly than companies, which amplifies consumer negativity. This heightened scrutiny reduces consumer identification with influencers; to protect their self-image, consumers distance themselves. The authors further examine three remedial strategies used by influencers, showing how they can restore media legitimacy and improve responses, advancing understanding of transgressions, influencer marketing, and media legitimacy.